12/5/2818 3:42 PM FILED Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL Case No. 2018-166226-CZ DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM, Hon. Denise Langford Morris a Michigan Non-Profit Corporation, Plaintiff, ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual, Defendants. Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Austin (PTSOOT) Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, P.C. Austin PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff Attorneys for Defendant Monica Morgan 28400 Northwestern Hwy, Second Floor 888 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 402 Southfield, MI 48034 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 354-4030 (248) 680-1660 rriharrell@rriaddinhausercom austinh@ix.netcom.com Michael A. Nedelman (P35433) Judith S. Gracey (P39766) Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC The Gracey Law Firm, PLLC Attorney for Defendants Alphons lacobelli Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden and Susanne Iacobelli 2200 Beechmont Street 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite T40 Keego Harbor, MI 48320 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 221-7726 (248) 855-8888 Judith@thegraceylawfirm.com mnedelman@nglegal.com NOTICE OF HEARING TO: Clerk of the Court All Counsel of Record PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff, The Skill Development and Training Program?s Motion to Quash Notice of Deposition and Requests for Admission and for Protective Order Regarding Discovery will be heard at the Oakland County Circuit Court, 1200 N. Telegraph Road, Pontiac, 03021008 VI 12/5/2818 3:42 PM Received for Filing Oakland County Clerk MI, 48341, before the Honorable Denise Langford Morris on December 12, 2018 at 8:30 am, or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard. Respectfully submitted, Michelle C. Harrell Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) lVladdin, Hauser, Roth Heller, PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy, Second Floor Southfield, MI 48034 (248) 354-4030 mharrell@maddinhausercom Dated: December 5, 2018 PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on December 5, 2018, electronically filed the above document(s) and this Proof of Service with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to those who are currently on the list to receive e-mail notices for this case. ls/ Michelle C. Harrell lVlichelle C. Harrell (P48768 03021008 v1 2 12/5/2018 3:42 FILED ?iOaktawei?County Clerk . FEE STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL Case No. 2018-166226-CZ DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM, Hon. Denise Langford Morris 3 Michigan Non-Profit Corporation, Plaintiff, ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual, Defendants. Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Austin (P15001) Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, P.C. Austin PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff Attorneys for Defendant Monica Morgan 28400 Northwestern Hwy., Second Floor 888 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 402 Southfield, MI 48034 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 354-4030 (248) 680-1660 mharrell@maddinhauser.com austinh@ix.netcom.com Michael A. Nedelman (P35433) Judith S. Gracey (P39766) Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC The Gracey Law Firm, PLLC Attorney for Defendants Alphons lacobelli Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden and Susanne lacobelli 2200 Beechmont Street 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Keego Harbor, MI 48320 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 221-7726 (248) 855-8888 Judith@thegraceylawfirm.com mnedelman@nglegal.com MOTION TO QUASH NOTICE OF DEPOSITION AND REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY Plaintiff, THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM through its counsel, Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, PC, for its Motion to Quash Notice of Deposition and Requests for Admission and For Protective Order, states: 1. This case deals with the insatiable desire for excessive wealth by certain individuals, including Defendants Alphons lacobelli and his wife, Susanne lacobelli (jointly, ?lacobellis"), and their scheme to get rich by stealing from Plaintiff NTC over several years. Their thefts from NTC netted them {03020547 v1} 12/5/2018 3:42 pm! .- Received for Comfy Clark over $2,600,000 in cash, paid-off credit cards, extravagant first-class travel and the finest goods and jewelry, a Ferrari Spyder convertible (valued over $350,000), grand home improvements of a pool, spa outdoor kitchen and landscaping (value over $250,000), their daughter?s paid-off student loan, and other benefits to which they were not entitled. 2. This Motion seeks an order quashing the lacobellis? Notice of Deposition of Plaintiff's representative that includes 98 subject matter areas, and their 219 Requests for Admissions, and the issuance of a protective order. See, Notice, Exhibit Requests for Admissions, Exhibit B. 3. Plaintiff seeks the requested relief because: the lacobellis have refused to respond to any discovery from Plaintiff, have refused to present themselves for deposition, have failed to produce a single document, refused to substantively answer the Complaint, all based upon their privileges against self-incrimination provided by the US. Constitution, Amend and XIV and the spousal privilege, and should therefore be barred from propounding discovery and Plaintiff is entitled to an inference against them as a matter of law as to all subject matters at issue this case; and the Notice and Requests for Admissions are unduly burdensome, excessive, seek irrelevant information regarding non-parties and legal issues outside the scope of this case, and are proposed solely to harass NTC. 2. Plaintiff NTC was organized through collective bargaining by the UAW, Fiat Automobiles and predecessors, including Corporation. NTC provides extensive training to FCA employees represented by the UAW, including ?World Class Manufacturing" processes, skilled trades, health and safety, and new hire training, among others. 0 1 4. Defendant Alphons lacobelli ("Alphons?) is a former-Vice President of FCA, and served as the Director and Co-President of NTC from 2008 to June 2015. Complaint, ? j14. Alphons was alSo a C0- Chairman of NTC. 5. During their tenures at NTC, Alphons and his cohorts conspired with each other to defraud {03020647 v1} 2 12/5/2018 3:42 PM escapees Firing oaki??h?d?t2'aunty Clerk NTC out of millions of dollars. Complaint, 111114-34. Alphons, while acting as Director and Co-President of NTC from 2009 to June 2015, embezzled and converted to his and/or the personal use of the other Defendants, including his wife Defendant Susanne lacobelli at least $2,661,189.00. Complaint, 1j1j35-36. 6. As shown by his plea agreement, Alphons has pled guilty in federal court to the crimes of conspiracy and income tax evasion based upon his theft (and failure to report) the funds that he stole from NTC. To date, Susannehas not been charged. The two other Defendants, Durden and Morgan, have also both plead guilty to federal-crimes and will be (or are) incarcerated, just like Alphons. 7. Due to Defendants? illegal activities, NTC filed this case and asserts the following claims: (1) fraud, (2) fraudulent concealment, (3) breach of fiduciary duties, (4) breach of duties of loyalty, good faith and fair dealing, (5) civil conspiracy, (6) unjust enrichment, and (7) accounting. 8. In response to the Complaint, the lacobellis each filed a motion for summary disposition, but such motions were denied by the Court. 9. The lacobellis both provided only objections to Plaintiff discovery requests and asserted their spousal privileges and the privileges against self-incrimination. See, Exhibit C, lacobellis" discovery ?response." 10. The lacobellis both answered the Complaint by including zero substantive responses but only a blanket invocation of the spousal privilege and. the privilege against self-incrimination. See, the lacobellis? answers to the Complaint, on file with the Court. 11. Although dates have been requested more than a month ago, the lacobellis have refused to provide any available dates for their depositions, chOOSing'instead to' send Plaintiff NTC their blunderbuss Notice of Deposition of NTC's representative with 98 categories of information/knowledge. Exhibit A. 12. . Although failing/refusing to provide any discovery responses themselves, the lacobellis served Plaintiff NTC with 219 Requiests forAdmissions. Exhibit B. {03020647 v1} 3 12/5/2018 3:42 PM ?Reoeived'for Ftil?g I Oakland County Clerk 13. Because the lacobellis have asserted their privileges, Plaintiff NTC is entitled to an inference against them in this case as to the subject matters upon which they have refused to respond, including but not limited to: the amounts improperly stolen and/or diverted by lacobellis from that the lacobellis caused and/or were responsible for the theft and/or diversion of funds; the uses of funds by the lacobellis and the nature of their purchases, use and benefits to provide themselves and their family members with luxuries, including the Ferrari, trips, home improvements, loan payoff, among other benefits; the improper payment of Susanne's credit cards using NTC funds; the improper payment of Alphons? credit cards using NTC funds; and the actions taken in furtherance of Defendants? conspiracy and scheme to benefit Defendants Morgan and Durden, as well as the now- deceased General Holiefield.?I 14. Due to the inference to which NTC is entitled, discovery propounded by the lacobellis upon such subject matters is improper, unnecessary and barred. In other words, the lacobellis are entitled to assert the privileges (subject to this Court's determination that such privileges have been properly invoked), but then must stand mute regarding those subject matters for which they refuse to respond (they can use the shield, but cannot then wield a sword). 15. The lacobellis should be barred from harassing NTC With 219 Requests for Admissions and 98 subject areas when they themselves have refused to respond to any discovery from Plaintiff relating to those same subjects thereby entitled Plaintiff to an evidentiary inference. 16. A protective order should be issued that prohibits the lacobellis from serving any discovery or seeking any deposition testimony that relates to the subject matters for which they have asserted the privileges. I 17. The Notice of Deposition should be quashed because its inclUsion of 98 categories renders it incapable of response thr0ugh a representative, and such Notice seeks testimony from 1 Plaintiff will be filing a Motion for Evi?dentiary Inference that more specifically identifies the areas and subject matters that would be part of the inference to be made in favor of Plaintiff based upon the lacobellis? specific responses that included the invocation of the privileges. {03020647 v1} 4 12/512018! 3:42 PM "Reserved rer'Firmg ?Oa?kifan?q County Clerk representative regarding matters that are no longer subject to discovery due to the lacobellis? assertion of the privileges, and the Notice seeks irrelevant information. 18. The Requests for Admission should be stricken because they are oppressive in number, not susceptible to response, and seek information upon the inferential categories and other irrelevant information. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that'this Court enter an order that: A. Quashes the Notice of Deposition and the Requests for Admissions; B. Prohibits the lacobellis from serving any discovery in this matter to NTC, or such other relief as the Court deems appropriate under the circumstances. Respectfully submitted, Michelle C. Harrell Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) . Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy., Second Floor Southfield, MI 48034 (248) 354-4030 mharrell@maddinhauser.com Dated: December 5, 2018 PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on December 5I 2018, electronically filed the above document(s) and this Proof of Service with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to those who are currently on the list to receive e-mail notices for this case. ls/ Michelle C. Harrell Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) {03020647 v1} 5 ?12/5/2018 3:42 PM FILED Received ran-tram? STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL Case No. 2018-166226-CZ DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM, Hon. Denise Langford Morris a Michigan Non-Profit Corporation, Plaintiff, ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual, Defendants. Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Austin (P15001) Maddin, Hauser, Roth 8 Heller, P.C. Austin PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff Attorneys for Defendant Monica Morgan 28400 Northwestern Hwy., Second Floor 888 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 402 Southfield, MI 48034 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 354-4030 (248) 680-1660 austinh@ix.netcom.com Michael A. Nedelman (P35433) Judith S. Gracey (P39766) Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC The Gracey Law Firm, PLLC Attorney for Defendants Alphons lacobelli Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden and Susanne lacobelli 2200 Beechmont Street 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Keego Harbor, MI 48320 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 221-7726 (248) 855?8888 Judith@thegraceylawfirm.com mnedelman@nglegal.com BRIEF lN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO QUASH NOTICE OF DEPOSITION AND REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY Plaintiff, THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM through its counsel, Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, Submits this Brief in Support of'its Motion to Quash Notice of Deposition and For Protective Order. I. INTRODUCTION AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND This case deals with the insatiable desire for excessive wealth by certain individuals, including Defendants Alphons lacobelli and his wife, Susanne lacobelli (jointly, ?Iacobellis"), and their scheme to get {03020769 v1} 12/5/2018 3:42 PM O?kf?a?i?n?d? County Clerk rich by stealing from Plaintiff NTC over several years. Their thefts from NTC netted them over $2,600,000 in cash, paid-off credit cards, extravagant first-class travel and the finest goods and jewelry, a Ferrari Spyder convertible (valued over $350,000), grand home improvements of a pool, spa outdoor kitchen and landscaping (value over $250,000), their daughter's paid-off student loan, and other benefits to which they were not entitled. This Motion seeks an order quashing the lacobellis' Notice of Deposition of Plaintiff's representative that includes98 subject matter areas and the 219 Requests for Admission, and the issuance of a protective order. See, Notice, Exhibit Requests for Admissions, Exhibit B. Plaintiff seeks the requested relief because: the lacobellis have refused to respond to any discovery from Plaintiff, have refused to present themselves for deposition, have failed to produce a single document, refused to substantively answer the Complaint, all based upon their privileges against self-incrimination provided by the US. Constitution, Amend and XIV and the spousal privilege, and should therefore be barred from propounding discovery and Plaintiff is entitled to an inference against them as a matter of law; and the Notice and Requests for Admissions are unduly burdensome, excessive and are proposed solely to harass NTC. Plaintiff NTC is was organized through collective bargaining by the UAW, Fiat Automobiles and FCA's predecessors, including Corporation NTC provides extensive training to FCA employees represented by the UAW, including ?World Class Manufacturing? processes, skilled trades, health and safety, and newhire training, among others. Defendant Alphons lacobelli ("Alphons") is a former Vice President and served as the Director and Co?President of NTC from 2008 to June 2015. Complaint, 1114. Alphons was also a C0- Chairman of NTC. During their tenures at NTC, Alphons and his cohorts conspired with each other to defraud out of millions of dollars of its assets. Complaint, 111114-34. Alphons, while acting as Director and Co-President of NTC from 2009 to June 2015, embezzled and converted to his and/or the personal use {03020769 v1} 2 '12r5/2o18 mm? "Received pansy-a ?county Cierk of the other Defendants, including his wife Defendant Susanne lacobelli of at least $2,661,189.00 of assets. Complaint, As shown by his plea agreement that Alphons himself attached to a previously-filed motion, Alphons has pled guilty in federal court to the crimes of conspiracy and income tax evasion based upon his theft (and failure to report) the funds that he stole from NTC. To date, Susanne has not been charged. The two other Defendants, Durden and Morgan, have also both plead guilty to federal crimes and will be (or are) incarcerated. Due to Defendants? illegal activities, NTC filed this case and asserts the following claims: (1) fraud, (2) fraudulent concealment, (3) breach of fiduciary duties, (4) breach of duties of loyalty, good faith and fair dealing, (5) civil conspiracy, (6) unjust enrichment, and (7) accounting. In response to the Complaint, the lacobellis each filed a motion for summary disposition, but such motions were denied by the Court. The lacobellis both provided only objections to Plaintiff NTC's discovery requests and asserted their spousal privileges and the privileges against self-incrimination. See, Exhibit C, lacobellis? discovery "response." The lacobellis both answered the Complaint by including zero substantive responses but only a blanket invocation of the spousal privilege and the privilege against self-incrimination. See, the lacobellis? answers to the Complaint, on file with the Court. Although dates have been requested more than a month ago, the lacobellis have refused to provide any available dates for their depositions, choosing instead to send Plaintiff NTC their blunderbuss Notice of Deposition with 98 categories of information/knowledge. Exhibit A. After losing their motions, and although failing/refusing to provide any discovery responses themselves, the lacobellis served Plaintiff NTC with 219 Requests for Admissions. Exhibit B. I Because the lacobellis have asserted their privileges, Plaintiff NTC is entitled to an inference against them as to the subject matters upon which they have refused to respond, including but net limited to: the amounts improperly stolen and/or diverted by lacobellis from that the lacobellis caused and/or were responsible for the theft and/or diversion of NTC's funds; (0) the uses of NTC's funds by the {03020769 v1} 3 12/5/2018 3:42? PM "R?eentesa?rammg ?caviar-3a County Clerk lacobellis and the nature of their purchases, use and benefits to provide themselves and their family members with luxuries, including the Ferrari, trips, home improvements, loan payoff, among other benefits; the improper payment of Susanne?s credit cards using NTC funds; the improper payment of Alphons? credit cards using NTC funds; and the actions taken in furtherance of Defendants' conspiracy and scheme to benefit Defendants Morgan and Durden, as well as the now-deceased General Holiefield. Due to the inference to which NTC is entitled, discovery propounded by the lacobellisupon such subject matters is improper and unnecessary. In other words, the lacobellis are entitled to assert the privileges (subject to this Dourt?s determination that such privileges have been properly invoked), but then must stand mute regarding those subject matters for which they refuse to respond (they can use the shield, but cannot then wield a sword). The lacobellis should be barred from harassing NTC with 219 Requests for Admissions and 98 subject areas when they themselves have refused to respond to any discovery from Plaintiff relating to those same subjects thereby entitled Plaintiff to an evidentiary inference. A protective order should be issued that prohibits the lacobellis from serving any discovery or seeking any deposition testimony that relates to the subject matters for which they have asserted the privileges. Additionally, the Notice of Deposition should be quashed because its inclusion of 98 categories renders it incapable of response through a representative, and such Notice seeks testimony from representative regarding matters that are no longer subject to discovery due to the lacobellis' assertion of the privileges, and the Notice seeks irrelevant information. The Requests for Admission should be stricken because they are oppressive in number, not susceptible to response, and seek information upon the inferential categories and other irrelevant information. I II. ANALYSIS A. Standard of Review A party commences a civil action when filing a complaint with the court, and after doing so, the parties are permitted to obtain'discovery regarding any matter not privileged, which is relevant to the {03020769 v1} 4 1215/2018 '3?i42 County Clerk subject matter involved in the pending action.?" Thomas Cooley Law Doe 1, 300 Mich App 245, 260 (2013) quoting MCR 2.302 (emphasis added). Despite Michigan's broad discovery policy, the trial court should protect parties from excessive,?abusive, or irrelevant discovery requests. Cooley, 300 Mich App 245 at 260-261 citing Cabrera Ekema, 265 Mich App 402, 407 (2005). In deciding whether to do so, to seek entry of a protective order from the court, the court turns to theprocedure as set forth MCR. MCR states, in pertinent part, that a protective order may be granted on a showing of good cause and reasonable notice to ?protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense,? including one or more of the following: (1) that the discovery-not be had; (2) that the discovery may be had only on specified terms and conditions, including a designation of the time or place; A (4) that certain matters not be inquired into, or that the scope of the discovery be limited to certain matters; . . . "Good cause simply means satisfactory, sound or valid reason.? People Buie, 491 Mich 294, 319 (2012) (internal quotations omitted). The trial court has broad discretion to determine what constitutes ?good cause.? See Id, at 319-320. A variety of sound and valid reasons may support a trial court?s decision to limit discovery. Here, for the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff seeks to quash the Notice of Deposition and the Requests for Admissions and to obtain a protective order against the lacobellis? harassing and unnecessary discovery. B. Because the lacobellis have asserted the spousal privilege and their privileges against self-incrimination, Plaintiff NTC is entitled to 'an evidentiary inference and the lacobellis should be prohibited from seeking disCovery upon matters that are now. deemed inferred against them. in response to all of Plaintiff's allegations in the Complaint and discovery requests that seek information from the lacobellis regarding their theft, use of NTC funds, the'payment of their credit cards, the {03020769 v1} 5 12.151201 8 3:42pm? .. ?Ceopiy creek mechanics of their theft process,1 and the benefits that they each received from their fraudulent scheme, the lacobellis asserted their privileges against self-incrimination and refused to answer. The lacobellis also have not provided a single document in response to Plaintiff's requests for production of documents. So, not only have the lacobellis fully declined to respond, they have also been fully uncooperative as to matters that are generic facts and documents. Given that Alphons has already plead guilty to federal crimes based upon the factual predicate Of his theft from NTC and the related scheme with his cohorts, it comes as no surprise that Alphons would assert his privilege against self-incrimination in this matter. Also no surprise is that Susanne would invoke the spousal privilege to conceal the conversations between her and Alphons about how they were going to steal funds from NTC and get Susanne?s credit cards paid by NTC. However, there are consequences for "taking the Fifth? in civil actions, including that NTC is entitled to an inference against the lacobellis for all matters for which they "took the Fifth." ?The Fifth Amendment provides that no person ?shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.? People Wyngaard, 462 Mich 659, 671; 614 143 (2000). This privilege ?not only permits a person to refuse to testify against himself at a criminal trial in which he is a defendant, but also ?privileges him not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings.? Id at 671?672, quoting Minnesota Murphy, 465 US 420, 426; 104 Ct 1136; 79 Ed 2d 409 (1984). Unlike a criminal defendant's right to refuse to testify, the privilege against self?incrimination does not entitle a defendant to refuse to provide testimony in a civil action; rather, a defendant may invoke the privilege only after a potentially incriminating question has-been posed. Larrab'ee Sachs, 201 Mich App 107, 110; 506 2 (1993); People Guy, 121 Mich App 592, 612-613; 329 435 (1982). When a 1 For example, Susanne declines to respond as to how her personal credit card bills were submitted to NTC and nearly $900,000 was paid. NTC suspects that her husband, Alphons, improperly submitted those bills for payment after she provided them to him. However, both Susanne and Alphons have asserted the spousal privilege for the benefit of the other to protect their wrongful scheme from full disclosure. Although they can assert the privileges, NTC is entitled to a presumption of the facts as alleged by NTC. {03020769 v1} 6 1275/2618'3342 PM lei Fem ?osn-srxamomay Clark witness invokes the protection of the Fifth Amendment, it is incumbent on the trial court to determine whether any direct answer can implicate the witness and, on that basis, to either compel the witness to answer or sustain his refusal to do so. People vJoseph, 384 Mich 24, 29-30; 179 383 (1970); People Hoffa, 318 Mich 656, 661-663; 29 292 (1947). A trial judge is necessarily accorded broad discretion in determining the merits of a claimed Fifth Amendment privilege, United States Gaitan- Acevedo, 148 F3d 577, 588 (CA 6, 1998), and the application of Fifth Amendment principles must take into consideration the particular facts and context of the case. In re Morganroth, 718 F2d 161, 167 (CA 6, 1983); Joseph, supra at 29-30; Guy, supra at 608-609. See also annotations, 42 ALR Fed 793, 72 830 and 5 1404.2 In criminal cases, the court must instruct the jury that it cannot draw an inference of guilt from a defendant?s failure to testify about facts relevant to his case, Griffin California, 380 US 609 (1965). In civil cases, ?the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them.? Baxter Palmigiano, 425 US 308, 318 (1976); Phillips Deihm, 213 Mich App 389, 400 (1995); Matter of the Estate of Ellis, 143 Mich App 456, 463 (1985) (emphasis added). in other words, a court is entitled to draw adverse inferences against the defendant that pleads the Fifth, and the jury may be informed that the defendant pleaded the Fifth and declined to testify (or they can see that he or she is doing so at trial), and the jury or the. factfinder can consider this factor in deciding whether to impose liability. importantly, a party who invokes the Fifth Amendment before trial, such as during discovery, will be barred from later offering evidence or testimony on that issue. United States Sixty Thousand Dollars in U. 8. Currency, 763 Supp 909, 913 (ED Mich 1991). A party may. not use the Fifth Amendment to shield himself or herself from the opposition?s inquiries during discovery only to impale the opposition with surprise 2 Thelprivilege to be free from compelled self-incrimination under the Michigan Constitution is no more or no less extensive than the privilege afforded by the Fifth Amendment; thus, the principles of the federal and state cases are equally applicable. Paramount Pictures Corp Miskinis, 418 Mich 708, 726; 344 788 (1984); in re Stricklin, 148 Mich App 659, 663; 384 883 (1986). {03020769 v1} 7 12/572131 a ?Received "for Firing??GrahamCounty Clerk testimony or other evidence at trial. Id at 914. Once a civil litigant invokes the Fifth Amendment privilege on an issue, he or she will be barred from introducing other evidence on that issue. Traficant Commissioner of the IRS, 884 2d 258, 265 (6th Cir 1989); In re?l-Ieraud, 410 BR 569, 575-576 (Bank ED Mich 2009). In Traticant, a taxpayer appealed the US. Tax Court?s decision imposing a penalty for fraud due to the taxpayer?s alleged failure to report bribes as income. The Sixth Circuit held that "it was proper under principles of reciprocity for the Tax Court to bar Traticant, once he had invoked the privilege against self- incrimination on the authenticity of the statement and the tapes, from introducing other evidence on that matter." id at 265. The court further held that ?[sjuch limits are properly within the scope of cases holding that a party to civil litigation or other non-criminal proceedings may encounter costs imposed in exchange for the assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege.? Id. (citing Spevack Klein, 385 US 511, 515 (1967) and Baxter vPalmigiano, 425 US 308, 318 (1976). In this case, the lacobellis have ?taken the Fifth" as to all allegations of wrongdoing made by NTC in its Complaint and all discovery requests that seek facts from them as to their conduct. Likewise, they have refused to produce a single document that would evidence their wrongdoing. As a result, NTC is entitled to an inference against them on all of the alleged facts and documents regarding their conduct. Also, case law supports that the lacobellis should be barred from introducing any testimony or documents that would relate to any of the subject matters for which they "took the Fifth.? For example of how improper, unfair and repugnant the abuse of discovery and privileges by the lacobellis has been, and why the prohibition is so important to principles of justice and fairness to avoid prejudice to the party that did not "take the Fifth," the Requests for Admissions seek an admission from NTC that "Susanne did not request the NTC to pay the personal credit card charges of Susanne", yet Susanne invoked her privilege against self-incrimination and the spousal privilege when asked the very same question. See, Request for Admission #133, Exhibit B. Also, Alphons similarly ?took the Fifth" and invoked spousal privilege yet seeks an admission from NTC that he ?did not direct the NTC to pay the personal credit card charges of' ?his wife, Susanne. Id, #132. 80, based upon privilege (including spousal {03020769 v1} 8 ?Receives rat Firing? Oakland County Clerk privilege so their conversations about how to foist their scheme upon NTC is refused), neither Alphons or Susanne will answer as to how Susanne's nearly $900,000 in personal credit cards were somehow mysteriously paid by NTC yet they propound discovery upon the very same issue to NTC. This type of ?privilege whipsaw" where each defendant asserts a privilege and then disclaims knowledge is exactly what the inference should bar and this Court should prohibit. Accordingly, the oppressive Notice of Deposition and Requests for Admissions should be quashed as they seek to challenge the subject matters for which the lacobellis have ?taken the Fifth? and are barred from presenting any documentary or testimonial evidence. As shown by case law, such a prohibition is the appropriate cost to the lacobellis for asserting the privileges and choosing to stand mute. They must now stand mute as to those subject matters for all purposes. C. The Notice and Requests for Admission should both be quashed because they are excessive, not susceptible to response, harassing, and seek irrelevant information. In addition to the reasons set forth above, the Notice and Requests for Admission should be quashed because they are outrageous, excessive, harassing and seek discovery on matters that are outside the scope of any reasonable relevance to this case. First, there is no basis for 219 Requests for Admission as contained in the lacobellis' First Set of Requests for Admissions to Plaintiff. Exhibit B. Also, the Requests seem to seek information that the lacobellis intend to try to use outside this litigation. Specifically, the lacobellis repeatedly cited in their motions for summary disposition that they want NTC to be charged with some crime relating to Defendants? theft scheme. As a result, there are numerous requests seeking information about NTC's agreements with FCA, payments made to or for the benefit of various individuals and companies who are not parties to this case, and various other issues regarding fair labor management practices. None of these issues have any relevance to this case. To the contrary, Alphons seeks to retaliate against NTC for his own crimes and incarcerationwhich is not any proper focus of discovery. 7 Next, the Notice of Deposition includes 98 categories of information that the designated {03020769 v1} 9 12/5/2018 3:42pr "Receirvelaram'rrng representative at NTC would need to be able to address at deposition. As above, these categories include wholly irrelevant and inflammatory subject matters, such as support of NTC, payments/benefits to non-parties and other issues that have nothing to do with this case. For example, there are numerous questions about non-parties? Keith Mickens, Nancy Johnson, Dennis Williams, Richard Palmer, among many others. These persons have no reasonable relationship or relevance to this case and their inclusion is solely to harass NTC and the non-parties. As a result, the Notice should be quashed.3 CONCLUSION AND REQUEST FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter an order that: A. Quashes the Notice of Deposition and the Requests for Admissions; B. 'Prohibits the Iacobellis from serving any discovery in this matter to NTC, or such other relief as the Court deems appropriate under the circumstances. Respectfully submitted, Michelle C. Harrell Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy., Second Floor Southfield, MI 48034 (248) 354-4030 mharrell@maddinhauser.com Dated: December 5, 2018 3 Usually, NTC would request that the irrelevant subject matters be stricken from the Requests and the Notice, thereby leaving the relevant subject matters in place for the representative deposition and responses. However, because the Iacobellis are barred from presenting evidence upon the relevant subject matters due to the inferences against them and applicable case law, the Notice and Requests should be stricken in their entirety. {03020769 v1} 1 0 I 12/5/2018 "3:42 r-?lLEo? ReCeiveEd rm Fume" Oakta?dC'mnty Clerk PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on December 5l 2018, I electronically filed the above document(s) and this Proof of Service with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to those who are currently on the list to receive e-mail notices for this case. Michelle C. Harrell Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) {03020769 v1} 1 1 R?b??iv?ekd ngi'h?g; "'?O?i?kaam (Emmy Clerk 12/5/2818 3:42 PM EXHIBIT A 12/5/2018 3:42 PM *?Rse?cefavedm Filing 'O??kafa?a?coumy Clerk STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL . DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM a Michigan Non-Pro?t Corporation, Plaintiff, vi ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual, Defendants. Case No. 2018-166226-CZ Hon. Denise Langford Morris Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy., Second Floor South?eld, MI 48034 (248) 354-4030 mharrell@maddinhauser.com Michael A. Nedelman (P3 5433) Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC Attorney for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 855?8888 . mnedelman@nglegal.com Austin (P151001) . Austin PC. Attorneys for Defendant Monica Morgan 888 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 402 - Troy, MI 48084 (248) 680-1660 austinh@ix.netcom.com Judith S. Gracey (P39766) The Gracey Law Firm, PLLC Attorney for Defendant Jerome. Durden 2200 Beechmont Street Keego Harbor, MI 48320 (248) 221-7726 NOTICE OF TAKING PURSUANT TO MCR Notice is hereby given that on Decemberul3,l'2018,_ Defendant? "Alphons Iacobelli will, pursuant to MCR take the deposition upon oral examination of One or more of the of?cers, directors, or managing agents of Plaintiff The Skill Development and 7' 1751 15380.001_2018.1 1.12 12/5/2ois FILED Received farming? ?cakiaa?a'czoaniy Clerk Training Program (the or other person(s) who consent to testify on its behalf, on the following matters: 1. The decision by the NTC to authorize the institution of this lawsuit. 2. The reason why the NTC has not ?led suit against Dennis Williams, Nancy Johnson, Virdell King, Keith Mickens, Norwood Jewell and any other person(s) associated with the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agriculture Implement Workers of America (the to recover the alleged bene?t of payments made by the NTC to and/or for their bene?t that were not in furtherance of the lawful business activities and/or purpose of the:NTC. 3. The reason why the NTC has not ?led suit against entities organized by and/or associated with Dennis Williams, Nancy Johnson, Virdell King, Keith Mickens, Norwood Jewell, Cindy Estrada, and any other person(s) associated with the UAW, to recover the alleged - bene?t of payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of those entities that were not in furtherance of the lawful business activities and/or purpose of the NTC. 4. The assignment UAW of?cials, of?cers, directors, and/or any other members of that group referred to by the UAW leadership (collectively ?Leadership?) from 2005 to present with no intention that such UAW Leadership would perform any substantive work at and/or for the bene?t of the NTC. 5. The assignment any relatives of UAW Leadership from 2005 to present with no intention that such UAW Leadership relatives would perform any substantive work at and/or for the bene?t of the NTC. 1 6. The pay rates for all UAW Leadership and/or relatives of UAW Leadership appointed and/or assigned to the NTC. 7. The ?chargeback? by the NTC for payments made to and/0r for the bene?t of UAW Leadership and/or the relatives of UAW Leadership assigned perform substantive work for the NTC but instead spent their time doing work for and/or representing the interests. - 8. The agreement of the NTC to pay a ?administrative fee? payable on the amounts ?charged bac to Corporation and/or Fiat Automobiles US LLC (collectively by the NTC for the salaries and bene?ts payable to the UAW Leadership (and the relatives of UAW Leadership) on the NTC payroll including, but not limited to, the agreement to and/or the implementation of Ron Gettle?nger?s proposal for, imposition of and/or establishment of that ?administrative fee.? 9. The authority conferred upon and/or vested in Tammy Smith with respect to the planning and/or management of NTC meetings and conferences (including but net limited to those conferences 1n Las Vegas, Nevada and Florida such as the Florida Bene?t Conferences), including, but not limited to, her role 1n room assignments, payment arrangements for travel, food and accommodations, entertainment and other costs and expenses of attendees related to such meetings and. conferences. 10 The purchases made by Virdell King and reimbursement by the NTC of the costs incurred in connection with a party honoring and/or given for the bene?t of Norwood Jewell 2 175115380.001_2018.11.12 12/13/201 8' 3:42 PM FILED 'assayedmanage" 'o?k?a?narjeueiy Clerk 11. The identity of the person(s) who authorized the payment(s) and/or remittance(s) by the NTC in connection with, and the amount of payment(s) and/or remittance(s) (by way of reimbursement or otherwise) made in connection with, the party(ies) honoring Nate Gooden and/or arising from and/or related to his retirement. 12. The payments made and/or remittances by the NTC to Union Building Corporation, and the business purposes for all such payments and remittances. 13. The charitable purpose of Union Building Corporation. 14. The damages alleged to have been suffered by the NTC and sought to be recovered in this action. 15. The amounts reimbursed account of the alleged payments by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli. 16. The amounts reimbursed account of the alleged payments by the NTC upon the American Express account on which Susanne Iacobelli was the primary cardholder. 17. The business purpose(s) of the NTC. 18. The activities conducted by the NTC that are not consistent with the business purpose(s) of the NTC. 19. Why, if at all, the alleged payments to and/ or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli were not in furtherance of the business activities and/or purpose of the NTC. 20. Why, if at all, the alleged payments to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams, Nancy Johnson, Virdell King, Keith Mickens and any other person(s) associated with the UAW were not in furtherance of the business activities and/or purpose of the NTC. 21. Why, if at all, the alleged payments to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams, Nancy Johnson, Virdell King, Keith Mickens and any other person(s) associated with the UAW were not in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. ?22. The process required by the NTC from January 1, 2009 to June 9, 2015 for the submission of requests for reimbursement of expenses incurred on behalf of and/or for the bene?t of the NTC. - 23. The process employed by the NTC from January 1, 2009 to June 9, 2015 for the approval and payment of requests for reimbursement of expenses incurred on behalf of and/or for the bene?t of the NTC 24. How, if at all, Alphons IacO?belli ?hid his activities from members of the NTC internal accounting staff and others? as that phrase is used at Complaint 1114. 25. The identity of the members of the NTC ?internal accounting? staff referenced in Complaint 1114. - 26. The identity of the ?others? as that term is used at Complaint 1H4. 27. How and when Alphons Iacobelli was, if at all, appointed asla Vice-President of the NTC. 28. The duties, if any, attendant to the position and imposed. upon Alphons Iacobelli as a putative Vice-President of the NTC. 7' 175115380.001_2018.11.12 "strap? Received 151: mm oat-1mm? "ems Clerk 29. When and how Alphons Iacobelli was allegedly ?entrusted with, among others, the critical task of sustaining and 1mproving vital NTC programs? as that phrase IS used at Complaint 5. 30. Alphons Iacobelli? agreement, if any, to undertake responsibility on behalf of the NTC for ?the critical task sustaining and 1mproving vital NTC programs? as that phrase IS used at Complaint 1115. 31. The means by which Alphons Iacobelli allegedly ?controlled the ?nances and spending of the NTC, as that phrase IS used at Complaint 1H 6. 32. The identity of each of the of?cers, directors, employees and agents of the NTC that had any control over the ?nances/spending by the NTC from June 2009 through June 2015. 33. The role of Richard Palmer in the ?nances of and spending by the NTC. 34. The role of and the direction given to Glenn Shagnea 1n the ?nances of and spending by the NTC including, but not limited to, any oversight responsibility, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover human resources labor costs, and/or payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover fringe bene?t costs. 35. The role of and the direction given to Mike Keegan 1n the ?nances of and spending by the NTC including, but not limited to, any oversight responsibility, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover labor costs, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover health care costs, and/or payment from the NTC to CA US to cover fringe bene?t costs. 36. The role of and the direction given to John Franciosi 1n the ?nances of and spending by the NTC including, but not limited to, any oversight responsibility, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover labor costs, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover health care costs, and/or payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover fringe bene?t costs. 37. The role of and the direction given to Ken McCarter 111 the ?nances of and spending by the NTC including, but not limited to, any oversight responsibility, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover labor costs, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover health care costs, and/or payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover fringe bene?t costs. 38. The role of and the direction given to Mike Jessamy 1n the ?nances of and spending by the NTC including, but not limited to, any oversight responsibility, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover labor costs, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover health care costs, and/or payment from the NTC to CA US to cover fringe bene?t costs. 39. The role of and the direction given to Jimmy Davis in the ?nances of and spending by the NTC including, but not limited to, any oversight responsibility, payment from the NTC to CA US to cover labor costs, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover health care costs, and/or payment from the NTC to CA US to cover fringe bene?t costs 40. The role of and the direction given to Frank Slaughter 111 the ?nances of and spending by the NTC including, but not limited to, any oversight responsibility, payment from the NTC to CA US to cover labor costs, payment from the NTC to CA US to cover health care costs, and/or payment frOm the NTC to CA US to cover fringe bene?t costs 41. The role of and the direction given to Dave McAllister 1n the ?nances of and spending by the NTC including, but not limited to, any oversight responsibility, payment from the NTC 175115380.001_2018.11.12 12/5/2018 $472 PM BLED Receivedf5??i"litig? Clerk 42cover labor costs, payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover health care costs, and/or payment from the NTC to FCA US to cover fringe bene?t costs The identity of those persons who, on behalf of the NTC, authorized the NTC to sponSor, directly and/or indirectly, NASCAR?related events (including races). The business purpose of the NTC served by the Sponsorship, directly and/or indirectly, of NASCAR-related events (including races). The identity of those persons who, on behalf of the NTC, authorized the NTC to sponsor, directly and/or indirectly, the 400 NASCAR race(s). The business purpose of the NTC served by the sponsorship, directly and/or indirectly, the 400 NASCAR race(s). .The factual basis for the allegation set forth at Complaint 1119 that the speci?c charges comprising the referenced $187,145 in credit card charges were not in payment of charges incurred by Alphons Iacobelli for the bene?t of the NTC and/or 1n furtherance of the conduct of the business affairs of the NTC. The speci?c charges that comprise the $259,298 in credit card charges that were allegedly unrelated to NTC business, as referenced at Complaint 1120. How Alphons Iacobelli allegedly directed the NTC to pay the personal credit card charges of Defendant Susanne Iacobelli, as alleged at Complaint 1123. The factual basis for the allegation by the NTC and set forth at Complaint 1123 that all of the charges in the amount of $868,736 on Susanne Iacobelli?s American Express account ?were unrelated to NTC business expenses.? How the NTC determined that all of the charges in the amount of $868,736 on Susanne Iacobelli?s American Express account ?were unrelated to NTC business expenses.? The speci?c acts of alleged ?active concealmen by Alphons Iacobelli referenced at Complaint 1126. The factual basis for the allegation set forth at Complaint 1129 that Alphons Iacobelli ?knowingly concealed payments to themselves [Alphons Iacobelli and Jerome Durden] and others for the purchase of various personal items and travel The identity of the person(s) acting on behalf of the NTC entitled to have been made aware, and/or to whom Alphons Iacobelli should have disclosed, the alleged ?payments to themselves [Alphons Iacobelli and Jerome Durden] and others for the purchase of various personal items and travel? as that phrase is used at Complaint 1129. The factual basis for the allegation set forth at Complaint 1129 that Alphons. Iacobelli engaged 1n ?theft from the NTC. -. . The factual basis for the allegation set forth at Complaint 1131 that payments to Alphons Iacobelli were ?illegal. The investigation by the NTC to determine which of?cers, directors and/or other-agents and/or representatives of the were aware of alleged payments to and/or for the bene?t of 'Alphons Iacobelli, and when they were ?rst aware of such payments.-. 175115380.001_2018.ll.12 - 1 12/5/2011 8 3:42 PM 1 LED "Reserves for Wag Ca? arena? cam-y Clerk 57. The factual basis for the allegation set forth-at Complaint 1131 that Alphons lacobelli caused the issuance of a check in the amountof $262,219 to MMS Mortgage Services, Ltd. 58. The factual basis for the allegation set forth at Complaint 1132 that Alphons Iacobelli caused the NTC ?to pay $544,000 for swimming pools, spas, outdoor kitchens and landscaping at the homes of Defendants Alphons and Susanne Iacobelli and of Defendant Morgan and General Holie?eld.? issuance of a check in the amount of $262,219 to MMS Mortgage Services, Ltd. 59. The factual basis for the allegation set forth at Complaint 1135 that Alphons Iacobelli?s engaged in ?embezzlement.? 60. Alphons Iacobelli? participation, if any, in collecting the NTC credit card statements that were being mailed to the NTC. 61. Alphons Iacobelli? participation, if any, in changing the security settings for the NTC accounting software. 62. The identity of the ?senior UAW of?cials? referenced at Complaint 1139 63. The speci?c misrepresentations of material fact referenced at Complaint 1142, who made those speci?c alleged misrepresentations and when they were allegedly made. 64. The identity of the person(s) to whom the alleged misrepresentations referenced at Complaint 1142 were made, and the identity of any other person(s) present at the time of the alleged misrepresentations 65. When the speci?c misrepresentations referenced at Complaint 1142 were made. 66. How the speci?c misrepresentations of material fact referenced at Complaint 1142 were false when made. 67. How, if at all, the NTC relied upon those misrepresentations referenced at Complaint 1142. 68. The factual basis for the any claim by the NTC that it reasonably relied upon those alleged misrepresentations referenced at Complaint 1142. 69. How, if at all, the NTC was suffered damages by reason of any reasonable reliance upon those alleged misrepresentations referenced at Complaint 1142. 70. Alphons Iacobelli? 5 position as an alleged Director of the NTC (including when he was allegedly appointed to that position, how he was appointed to that position and by whom he was allegedly appointed to that position). 71. Alphons Iacobelli? 3 position as an alleged Co-President of the NTC (including when he was allegedly appointed to that position, how he was appointed to that position, and by Whom he was allegedly appointed to that position). - . 72. When and how the NTC allegedly learned that the alleged misrepresentations referenced at Complaint 1142 were false. 73. The factual basis for the allegation set forth at Complaint 1152. 74. The source of the duty, if such duty exists, on the part of Alphons Iacobelli to act in the best interests. 75. Who on behalf of the NTC resposed trust, faith and confidence 1n Alphons Iacobelli. 6 175115380.001_2018.11.12 12/6/2618 3:42 PM - . FELED Fitting Oakia?nd? enemy Clerk 4 76. How, if at all, the alleged reposing of trust, faith and con?dence by the NTC in Alphons Iacobelli was communicated to Alphons Iacobelli 77. The speci?c act(s) that the NTC alleges were engaged in by Alphons Iacobelli that constituted a breach by Alphons Iacobelli of any duty he may have owed to the NTC. 78. The knowledge held by the NTC that Alphons Iacobelli was at all times acting in the best interests of FCA US. 79. The expectation of the NTC that Alphons Iacobelli would at all times act in the best interests of CA US. 80. The identity of all persons with personal knowledge of the facts alleged in the Complaint, and the speci?c personal knowledge held by each such person 81. The speci?c Conduct by Alphons Iacobelli that the NTC claims was take for the purpose of allegedly concealing Mr. Iacobelli? conduct. 82. The identity of the ?others? referenced 1n the ?rst sentence of Complaint 1165. 83. The identity of the ?others? referenced in the ?rst sentence of Complaint 1[66. 84. The factual basis for the allegation set forth at Complaint 1175. 85. The process by which the NTC requested payment and/or reimbursement from the ?reserve? funds held in an account in the name of the NTCthe ?reserve? funds held in an account in the name of the NTC. 88. The control by the NTC of the ?reserve? ?mds held in an account in the name of the NTC. 89. The letter agreement(s) between the NTC and FCA US relating to the reimbursement funds spent; the advance of money anticipation of funds to be spent by the and/or draw requests by the NTC in connection with the construction of the WCM Academy. 90. The identity of the person(s) who, on behalf of the NTC, had the authority to release funds . from the bank account(s) titled in the name of the NTC. 91. The identity of the person(s) who, on behalf of the NTC, had the ahthority to authorize payment by the NTC from the bank account(s) titled 1n the name of the NTC. 92. The contribution and/or remittance by the NTC to one or more charities established by and/or associated with one or more of the UAW members of the NTC Board of Directors. 93. The contribution and/or remittance by the NTC to one or more charities established by and/or associated with the UAW members who were or were held out to be of?cers of the NTCfunds held 1n accounts titled 1n the NTC bank accounts to pay for extended stays by UAW employees and/or of?cials 1n Palm Springs, CA. 95. The process by which the NTC was reimbursed by CA US for funds expended by and/or- on behalf of the NTC. -. 96. The process by which the NTC was reimbursed by CA US for funds expended by and/or on behalf of FCA US. 175115380.001_2018.l 1.12 "12/51/201 PM ?R?tiie??weaferFiring U?kiand'County?lerk 97. The terms and conditions of the letter between John Franciosi and Nate Golden relating to the ?backstop? of NTC expenses, addressing the obligation of FCA US to cover incremental expenses up to $20 Million above the ?draw? amount. 98. The ??oat? maintained by the NTC to cover expenses not recorded on the draw requests made by the NTC to FCA US The deposition will be taken before a stenographer at the of?ces of Nedelman Legal Group PLLC, 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140, armington Hills, MI 48334 commencing at 10:00 am. and will be continued from day-to?day until completed. You are invited to attend and examine the witness(es). Respectfully submitted, By: Michael A. Nedelman Michael A. Nedelman (P3 543 3) Attorneys for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, Michigan 48334 Telephone: (248) 855-8888 Dated: November-12, 2018 l75115380.001_2018.11.12 1215/2018 3:42 'Fi?t?Eoi? "Rieie?ive'd farming Oakland County Clerk STATEOF MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM a Michigan Non-Pro?t Corporation, Plaintiff, V. ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME BURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual, Defendants. Case No. 20189166226-CZ Hon. Denise Langford Morris Michelle Harrell (P48768) Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy., Second Floor South?eld, MI 48034 (248) 354?4030 mharrell@maddinhauser.com Michael A. Nedelman (P3 543 3) Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC Attorney for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli' and Susanne Iacobelli . 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Fannington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 855-8888 mnedelman@nglegal.com Austin (P151001) Austin P.C. Attorneys for Defendant Monica Morgan 888 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 402 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 680-1660 austinh@ix.netcom.com Judith S. Gracey (P39766) The Gracey Law Firm, PLLC Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden 2200 Beechmont Street Keego Harbor, MI 48320 (248) 221-7726 . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on November 12, 2018, I served a copy of Notice of Taking Deposition on all counsel of record via ?rst class mail I declare that the above statement is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. - 175115380.00l_2018.1 1.12 Michelle K. Water MICHELLE K. WATLER 'R?'c?ived :er Fiimg bakia?dCOu?ty Clerk EXHIBIT PM 12/6/2818 3:42 Renewed "Oakland Gaunty Cierk' STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM a MICHIGAN NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. ALPHONS an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual Defendants. CASE No. 18-166226-CZ Hon. D. Langford Morris MADDIN, HAUSER, ROTH HELLER By: Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy, 211d Floor South?eld, MI 48034 (248 354-4030 mharrell@maddinhauser.com AUSTIN P.C. Austin (P15001) Attorney for Defendant Monica Morgan 888 W. Big Beaver Rd., Suite 402 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 680 1660 austinh@austinhirshhorn.com NEDELMAN LEGAL GROUP PLLC By: Michael A Nedelman (P3 5433) Attorneys for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 855-8888 mnedelman@nglegal.com THE GRACEY LAW FIRM, PLLC Judith S. Gracey (P39766) Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden 2200 Beechmont Street Keego Harbor, MI 48320 (248) 221 ?7726 FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION TO PLAINTIFF Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli, through their attorneys, submits the following First Set of Requests for Admission to Plaintiff The Skill Development and Training Program (the 7 175115388001 {214 . 12/5/2818 3:42 PM ?Receives ?courtly Clerk 1. INSTRUCTIONS A. Reservation of Rights: No Waiver These discovery requests are not intended and shall not be construed or asserted to constitute a waiver by Defendants of (1) any of their respective defenses to Plaintiff 3 claims; (2) Defendants? entitlement to summary disposition in its favor; or (3) any claim(s) against Plaintiff or any other party. B. R_queSts For Admissions. These Requests For Admissions are directed to Plaintiff pursuant to MCR 2.312. Plaintiff shall separately admit the matter, deny the matter with speci?city or set forth in detail the reasons why such Plaintiff cannot truthfully admit or deny the matter. A denial shall fairly meet the substance. of the requested admission and, when good faith requires that if Plaintiff qualify its answer or denies only a part of a matter of which an admission is requested, Plaintiff shall specify so much of it as is true and qualify or deny the remainder. Plaintiff may not give lack of information or knowledge as a reason for failure to admit or deny unless Plaintiff state that such Plaintiff has made reasonable inquiry and that the information known or obtainable by such Plaintiff is insuf?cient to enable it to admit or deny. Any matter admitted pursuant to these Requests For Admissions is conclusively established. Failure to respond in accordance with these instructions and the Michigan Court Rules Ishall constitute a deemed admission of the matters requested. In the event Defendants are successful in obtaining by motion or court order that any answer is insuf?cient or any objection unjusti?ed, Plaintiff 'shall be held liable fOr.expenses as provided in MCR II. DEFINITION OF TERMS 175115388001 12/5/2018 3:42 PM Rammed for'Filing Oakia??county Clerk" As used in this First Set of Discovery, the following terms shall have the following meanings: 1. ?Complaint? shall mean Plaintiff?s June 8, 2018 Complaint in this matter. 2. ?Plaintiff? or shall mean Plaintiff The Skill Development and Training Program. 3. ?Defendants? shall mean Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli. 4. The term ?describe in detail? means: A. Describe fully with reference to underlying facts rather than by reference to ultimate facts or conclusions of fact or law; B. Where applicable, particularize as to: time, (ii) place, and manner; and C. Set forth all relevant facts necessary for a complete understanding of the act, process, event or thing in question. D. ?Discovery Requests? means Defendant?s First Set of Discovery to Plaintiff. 5. ?Document? is intended to have the same meaning as the term is used under MCR 2.309, and includes electronic data. Document includes, without limitation, any of the following whether written (handwritten, typed or printed); printed; and/or reproduced, recorded, kept or maintained by any mechanical or electronic process: Accounting records and data; actuarial records and data; account statements; advertisements; appointment books; circulars, press releases; agreements; audiotapes; audits; books; calendars; circulars; communications; computations (both in existence and stored in memory components); correspondence; computerized data; computer discs; computer memory; computer tapes; contracts; credit card bills; diagrams, data processing results; diaries; digital video; drafts; drawings; e-mails; graphs; ?lms; ?nancial statements; interof?ce communications; invoices; journals; ledgers; letters; licenses; magazines; manuals; maps; and micro?che; minutes; newspaper articles; notebooks; notes; notices; offers; opinions or reports of consultants; pamphlets; papers; periodical bulletins; photographs; plans; printouts; proposals; prospectuses; receipts; regulations; reports; reports of state and federal governments and governmental agencies; rules; tables; telegrams; telephone records; ticket stubs; time sheets and/or logs;.transcripts; sketches; summaries, reports or records of telephone conversations, personal interviews, 175115388.00] 12/5/2018? 3:42 PM Retained for-Filing? "Oakland ceuniy Clerk investigations or negotiations, meetings or conferences; videotapes; word processing documents; work papers; any marginal comments appearing on any document, and all other information, writings, data or records especially those which any person might utilize as a means to refresh recollection, together with things similar to any of the foregoing, however denominated, and other compilations from which information can be obtained or translated, if necessary, through detection devices into reasonably usable form. The term also includes all ?writings,? ?recordings,? ?originals,? and ?duplicates,? as those terms are de?ned in Rule 1001 of the Michigan Rules of Evidence, including but not limited to, copies and non-identical copies (whether different from the originals because of notes or marks made on or attached to the copies, or otherwise). 6. When requested to state the ?factual basis? of any allegation in a pleading or a preceding answer, identify each occurrence or incident and the fact upon which the answering party relies to support such allegation or answer, including the date thereof; (ii) the place thereof; the substance of each occurrence or incident and the fact upon which the answering party relies to support the allegation or answer; (iv) identi?cation of each person who participated therein; identi?cation of each person present; and (vi) the source of your knowledge thereof. 7. shall mean FCA US, LLC. 8. When requested to identify or to give the identi?cation or identity of any person, give his/her full name; (ii) current home and business address; home and business telephone number; (iv) employer, if any, and current position with such employer. When requested to identify documents, recite the complete name, date and any other identifying features of the document. 9. ?Leadership? shall mean those of?cials, of?cers, directors, and/or any other members of that group referred to by the UAW ?leadership.? 10. When requested to state the "legal basis" of any allegation made in a pleading or claim made in this case: A. State the general theory(ies) and principle(s) on which you rely; 1751 15388.001 125/2018 3342 PM Reserved" for'FEIinig? "Oakland Camry Clerk B. Set forth speci?cally with complete citations all laws, statutes, cases, and authorities in support of such theory(ies) and principle(s) applied speci?cally to the facts and circumstances surrounding the pertinent aspects of the case. 11. ?Person? shall mean any individual, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, entity, unincorporated association or trust. 12. ?Produce? means that the documents should be delivered to Michael A. Nedelman, Esq. in accordance with) the instructions set forth in ID, supra. DISCOVERY REQUESTS REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 1. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams that were not in furtherance of the lawful business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 2. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Nancy Johnson that were not in furtherance of the lawful business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 3. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Virdell King that were not in furtherance of the lawful business of the NTC. RESPONSE: 175115388001 1 A . Received Cierk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 4. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Keith Mickens that were not in furtherance of the lawful business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 5. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of General Holie?eld that were not in furtherance of the lawful business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 6. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Michael Brown that were not in furtherance of the lawful business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 7. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of person(s) associated with the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agriculture Implement Workers of America (the that were not in furtherance of the lawful business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 8. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments Were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams that were not in furtherance of the purpo~se(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: 7175115388001 12/5/2818 "rage mariiaag 03mm County Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 9. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Nancy Johnson that were not in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 10. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Virdell King that were not in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 11. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Keith Mickens that were not in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 12. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of General Holie?eld that were not in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: FOR ADMISSION: l3. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Michael Brown that were not in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: .175115388001 ?Reserves ?re?tting? 'o?kiane??coumy Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 14. Admit that the NTC has concluded that payments were made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of person(s) associated with the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agriculture Implement Workers of America (the that were not in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 15. Admit that frOrn 2005 to present, the UAW assigned to the NTC UAW of?cials, of?cers, directors, and/or any other members of Leadership with no intention that such UAW Leadership would perform any substantive work at and/or for the bene?t of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 16. Admit that from 2005 to present the UAW assigned to the NTC relatives of UAW Leadership with no intention that such UAW Leadership relatives would perform any substantive work at and/or for the bene?t of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 17. Admit that from 2005 to present the UAW caused the NTC to employ relatives of UAW Leadership with no . intention that such UAW Leadership relatives would perform any substantive work at and/or for the bene?t of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 18. Admit that the pay rates for all UAW Leadership appointed and/or assigned to the NTC were approximately $1 8/hour more than the highest rate paid by FCA US to any employee on the FCA US assembly line. RESPONSE: 175115388001 12/5/2018 3:42? PM LED R?b?lv??d fer ?Filling?" ?4 Oakiandc mm ler?k? REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 19. Admit that the pay rates for all relatives of UAW Leadership that UAW Leadership caused to be appointed to, assigned to, engaged by and/or employed by the NTC were approximately $18/hour more than the highest rate paid by FCA US to any employee on the FCA US assembly line. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 20. Admit that the NTC ?charged back? to Group LLC, f/k/a LLC and/or FCA US the payments made to and/or for the bene?t of UAW Leadership assigned to the NTC who did not perform substantive work for the NTC but instead spent their time doing work for and/or representing the interests. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 21. Admit that the NTC ?charged back? to and/or FCA US the payments made to and/or for the bene?t of the relatives of UAW Leadership appointed to, assigned to, engaged by and/or employed by the NTC who did not perform substantive work for the NTC but instead spent their time doing work for and/or representing the interests. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 22. Admit that the NTC agreed at the request of Ron Gettle?nger to pay a 7% ?administrative fee? payable on the amounts ?charged back? to FCA US by the NTC for the salaries and bene?ts payable to the UAW Leadership on the NTC payroll. RESPONSE: 175115388.001 - A . . 1 - 12/5/2018 3:42 PM FELED Recs-area fer mm Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 23. Admit that the NTC agreed at the request of Ron Gettle?nger to pay a 7% ?administrative fee? payable on the amounts ?charged back? to by the NTC for the salaries and bene?ts payable to the UAW Leadership on the NTC payroll. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 24. Admit that the NTC agreed at the request of Ron Gettlefmger to pay a 7% ?administrative fee? payable on the amounts ?charged back? to FCA US by the NTC for the salaries and bene?ts payable to the relatives of UAW Leadership on the NTC payroll. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 25. Admit that the NTC agreed at the request of Ron Gettle?nger to pay a 7% ?administrative fee? payable on the amounts ?charged back? to by the NTC for the salaries and bene?ts payable to the relatives of UAW Leadership on the NTC payroll. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 26. Admit that Tammy Smith had unrestricted authority and responsibility with respect to the planning and/or management of NTC meetings and conferences (including but not limited to those conferences in Las Vegas, Nevada and Florida such as the Florida Bene?t Conferences), including, but not limited to, room assignments; payment arrangements for travel, food and accommodations; entertainment (including the payment for such entertainment); and other costs and expenses of attendees related to such meetings and conferences. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 27. Admit that Virdell King made purchases on behalf of and received reimbursement from the NTC in connection with a party honoring and/or given for the'benefit of Norwood Jewell. RESPONSE: 10 175115388001 12/5/213128? 3":42 PM ?R?ee?v?ldier?fitting? Demand County Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 28. Admit that an authorized employee, agent and/or representative of the NTC authorized the payment(s) and/or remittance(s) by the NTC in connection with the party(ies) honoring Nate Gooden and/or arising from and/or related to his retirement. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 29. Admit that an authorized employee, agent and/or representative of the NTC approved the amount of payment(s) and/or remittance(s) (by way of reimbursement or otherwise) made in connection with, the party(ies) honoring Nate Gooden and/or arising from and/or related to his retirement. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 30. Admit that the NTC paid and/or made remittances to Union Building Corporation. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 31. Admit that the NTC paid and/or made remittances for the bene?t of Union Building Corporation. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 32. Admit that the NTC paid and/or made remittances to third parties intended by the NTC to be remitted to Union Building Corporation. RESPONSE: 11 7 175115388.001 12/5/20: 8* "3:42 PM Received fox? Filing oaksand County Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 33. Admit that the payments and/or remittances to and/or for the bene?t of, or intended by the recipient to be remitted to, Union Building Corporation were not in furtherance of the business purposes of the NTC. RESPONSE REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 34. Admit that Union Building Corporation is not a bona?de charity. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 35. Admit that the NTC did not suffer any damages as a result of the alleged acts and/or omissions of Alphons Iacobelli as alleged in the Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 36. Admit that Susanne Iacobelli did not bene?t from payments made to American Express in satisfaction of the charges made on the American Express account on which Susanne Iacobelli is the primary cardholder, and which charges were made for the bene?t of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 37. Admit that the NTC did not suffer any damages as a result of the alleged acts and/or omissions of Susanne Iacobelli as alleged in the Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 38. Admit that FCA US reimbursed the NTC for all alleged payments by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli. RESPONSE: 12 I 175115388.001 12/5/2618 32:42 PM for :F'ii'iri'g'll "O??'kiand County? Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 39. Admit that CA US reimbursed to the NTC the amount of all payments made by the NTC upon the American Express account on which Susanne Iacobelli was the primary cardholder. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 40. Admit that the business purpose(s) of the NTC includes the payment of funds provided by FCA US to of?cers and employee's of the UAW in an effort to obtain bene?ts for FCA US in the negotiation, implementation and/or administration of the collective bargaining agreements between FCA US and the UAW. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 41. Admit that the payment of funds provided by FCA US to of?cers and employees of the UAW in an effort to obtain bene?ts for US in the negotiation, implementation and/or administration of the collective bargaining agreements between FCA US and the UAW were payments made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 42. Admit that the business purpose(s) of the NTC includes the payment of funds provided by FCA US to of?cers and employees of the UAW in an effort to obtain concessions for FCA US in the negotiation, implementation and/or administration of the collective bargaining agreements between CA US and the UAW. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 43. Admit that the business purpose(s) of the NTC includes in the ordinary course of business of the NTC the payment of funds provided by FCA-US to of?cers and employees of the UAW in an effort to obtain concessions for CA US in the negotiation, implementation and/or administration of the collective bargaining agreements between FCA US and the UAW. RESPONSE: 13 17511538800] 12/5/2018 3:42 PM FILED to? Hang Oakland County Clark REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 44. Admit that the business purpose(s) of the NTC includes the payment of funds provided by FCA US to of?cers and employees of the UAW in an effort to obtain advantages for FCA US in the negotiation, implementation and/or administration of the collective bargaining agreements between FCA US and the UAW. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 45. Admit that the business purpose(s) of the NTC includes in the ordinary course of business the payment of funds provided by FCA US to of?cers and employees of the UAW in an effort to obtain advantages for FCA US in the negotiation, implementation and/or administration of the collective bargaining agreements between FCA US and the UAW. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 46. Admit that the NTC does not con?ne its activities to those lawful activities allowed to be conducted by a tax exempt organization as described by Internal Revenue Code ?501(c). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 47. Admit that the NTC does not in the ordinary cOurse of business of the NTC con?ne its activities to those lawful activities allowed to be conducted by a tax exempt organization as described by Internal Revenue Code ?501(c). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 48. Admit that the alleged payments to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli were in furtherance of the business activities and/or purpose of the NTC. RESPONSE: 14 175115388001 12/5/2018 FitEo? Hamel-11m Hang Coumy Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 49. Admit that all of the requests for reimbursement submitted by Alphons Iacobelli were approved by an authorized employee, agent, of?cer and/or director of the NTC other than Alphons Iacobelli, prior to reimbursement by the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 50. Admit that all ?of the payments to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli were approved by an authorized employee, agent, of?cer and/or director of the NTC other than Alphons Iacobelli, prior to such payment by the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 51. Admit that all of the payments to and/or for the bene?t of Susanne Iacobelli were approved by an authorized employee, agent, of?cer and/or director of the NTC other than Alphons Iacobelli, prior to such payment by the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 52. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of "Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams were in furtherance of the usual and customary business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 53. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Nancy Johnson Were in furtherance of the usual and customary business activities of the NTC. - RESPONSE: 15 175115388001 1215/2'o1 8 3:42 PM ReCeiV?d fer Filing? Oakland County Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 54. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Virdell King were in furtherance of the usual and customary business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 55. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Keith Mickens were in furtherance of the usual and customary business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 56. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the benefit of Monica Morgan were in furtherance of the usual and customary business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 5 7 Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of any other person(s) associated with the UAW were in furtherance of the usual and customary business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 58. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams, Nancy Johnson, Virdell King, Keith Mickens and any other person(s) associated with the UAW were in furtherance of the usual and customary business activities of the NTC. RESPONSE: l6 '175115388001 12/5/2618! 3:42 PM ., - ?Renewedre?ning? O?ki??d mum Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 59. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams were in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 60. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Nancy Johnson were in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 61. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Virdell King were in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 62. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Keith Mickens were in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 63. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Monica Morgan were in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 64. Admit that all of the payments that were made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of any other person(s) associated with the UAW were in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: l7 .175115388.001 12/5/2818 i a; Brag i lmgOakiand Wk A REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 65. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams, Nancy Johnson, Virdell King, Keith Mickens and any other person(s) associated with the UAW were in furtherance of the purpose(s) of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 66. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams, Nancy Johnson, Virdell King, Keith Mickens and any other person(s) associated with the UAW were authorized by one or more directors of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 67. Admit that all of the payments made to and/or for the bene?t Alphons Iacobelli were authorized by one or more directors of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 68. Admit that all of the payments made to and/or for the bene?t Alphons Iacobelli were authorized by one or more authorized of?cers, agents and/or employees of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 69. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Susanne Iacobelli were authorized by one or more of?cers, directors, agents and/or employees of the NTC. RESPONSE: 18 175115388001 12/5/2018 County-Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 70. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams were authorized by one or more authorized of?cers, directors, employees and/or agents of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 71. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons lacobelli to and/or for the bene?t {of Nancy Johnson were authorized by one or more authorized of?cers, directors, employees and/or agents of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 72. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons lacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Virdell King were authorized by one or more authorized of?cers, directors, employees and/or agents of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 73. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons lacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Michael Brown were authorized by one or more authorized of?cers, directors, employees and/or agents of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 74. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons lacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of any person(s) associated with the UAW were authorized by one or more authorized of?cers, directors, employees and/or agents of the NTC. RESPONSE: 19 175115388.001 "R'?if?'ive? Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 75. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of General Holie?eld were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 76. Admit that all ofthe payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams, were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 77. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Nancy Johnson, were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 78. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Virdell King, were made in the ordinary Course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 79. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Keith Mickens, were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 80. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of Michael Brown, were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: 20 175115388001 12/5/2018 3:42 PM amuseranging? O?kl??dtounty Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 81. Admit that all of the payments made by the NTC at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of each person(s) associated with the UAW were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 82. Admit that all of the payments by the NTC made at the request of Alphons Iacobelli to and/or for the bene?t of General Holie?eld, were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 83. Admit that all of the payments by the NTC made at the request of Jerome Durden to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 84. Admit that all of the payments by the NTC made at the request of Jerome Durden to and/or for the bene?t of Nancy Johnson were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 85. Admit that all of the payments by the NTC made at the request of Jerome Durden to and/or for the bene?t of Virdell King were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 86. Admit that all of the payments by the NTC made at the request of Jerome Durden to and/or for the bene?t of Keith Mickens were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: 21 '175115388001 ?12/512618 3:42 PM WI . . in? "Filing 'O?ki??d"teuniy Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 87. Admit that all of the the NTC made at the request of Jerome Durden to and/or for the bene?t of Michael Brown were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 88. Admit that all of the payments by the NTC made at the request of Jerome Durden to and/or for the bene?t of any other person(s) associated with the UAW were made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 89. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of General Holie?eld were not made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 90. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams were not made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 91. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t Nancy Johnson were not made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 92. Admit that all of the alleged payments made. by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Virdell King were not made in the ordinary course of buSiness of the NTC. . RESPONSE: 22 7 175115388001 12/5/2018 3:42 PM named mi Firing "'??O?'iti?anid County Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 93. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Keith Mickens were not made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 94. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Michael Brown were not?made in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 95. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of any other person(s) associated with the UAW were not in the ordinary course of business of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 96. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Dennis Williams were not lawfully permitted to be made by the NTC as an organization claiming non-pro?t status under 26 U.S.C. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 97. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t Nancy 1 Johnson were not lawfully permitted to be made by the NTC as an organization claiming non- pro?t status under 26 U.S.C. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 98. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Virdell King were not lawfully permitted to be made by the NTC as an organization claiming non? pro?t status under 26 U.S.C. RESPONSE: . 23 175115388001 12/5/2018 "Retail-ea"tarmac-Hag oa ki'jaane??coamy Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 99. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Keith Mickens were not lawfully permitted to be made by the NTC as an organization claiming non- pro?t status under 26 U.S.C. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 100. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Michael Brown were not lawfully permitted to be made by the NTC as an organization claiming non-pro?t status under 26 U.S.C. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 101. Admit that all of the alleged payments made by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of any other person(s) associated with the UAW were not lawfully permitted to be made by the NTC as an organization claiming non-pro?t status under 26 U.S.C. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 102. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli did not have the authority to approve reimbursement to himself of charges made on behalf of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 103. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli did not authorize reimbursement to himself of charges made on behalf of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 104. Admit that the process employed by the NTC from January 1, 2009 to June 9, 2015 for the-approval and payment of requests for reimbursement of expenses incurred on behalf of and/or for the bene?t of the NTC required ?nal approval by Richard Palmer (?Palmer?). RESPONSE: 24 175115388001 PM Reidei?Ved ?rm-mm 'O?akiaw?cmmy Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 105. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli never ?hid his activities from members of the NTC internal accounting staff and others? as that phrase is used at Complaint ?14. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 106. Admit that the NTC did not in all respects function as a labor management committee within the meaning of the Labor Management Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 107. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli was never appointed as a Vice?President of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 108. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli was never ?entrusted with, among others, the critical task of sustaining and improving vital NTC programs? as that phrase is used at Complaint RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 109. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli never agreed to undertake responsibility on behalf of the NTC for ?the criticalitask sustaining and improving vital NTC programs? as that phrase is used at Complaint 15. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 110. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli never ?controlled the. ?nances and spending of the as that phrase is used at Complaint 1H 6. . RESPONSE: . 25 7175115388001 12/5/2618 3:42 PM "Received first" Filing Oakland County Clerk I REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 111. Admit that Palmer was required to approve all expenditures by the NTC for the period of June 8, 2012 through June 9, 2015. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 112. Admit that Palmer approved the payments allegedly made to Alphons Iacobelli that form the subject matter Of Plaintiff? Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 113. Admit that Palmer was not misled as to the purpose of the payments allegedly made to Alphons Iacobelli forming the subject matter of Plaintiff? Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 114. Admit that Palmer was not misled as to the purpose Of the payments allegedly made for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli forming the subject matter of Plaintiff?s Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 115. Admit that Palmer was not misled as to the purpose Of the payments allegedly made for the bene?t Of Susanne Iacobelli forming the subject matter of Plaintiffs COmplaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 116. Admit that Palmer approved the payments to Jerome Durden that form the subject matter of Plaintiff Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 117. Admit that Palmer was not misled as to the purpose Of the payments to Jerome Durden forming the subject matter Of Plaintiff? Complaint. RESPONSE: 26 7175115388001 12/5/2018 3:422 PM Receav?ewmm "b?ki'and Camry Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 118. Admit that Palmer was not misled as to the purpose of the payments made for the bene?t of Jerome Durden forming the subject matter of Plaintiff? Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 119. Admit that Palmer approved the payments to Monica Morgan that form the subject matter of Plaintiff? Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 120. Admit that Palmer was not misled as to the purpose of the payments to Monica Morgan forming the subject matter of Plaintiff?s Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 121. Admit that Palmer was not misled as to the purpose of the payments made for the bene?t of Monica Morgan forming the subject matter of Plaintiff? Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 122. Admit that Palmer approved the payments to General Holie?eld that that are described in Plaintiff? Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 123. Admit that Palmer was not misled as to the purpose of the payments to General Holiefield that are described in Plaintiff? Complaint. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 124. Admit that Palmer was not misled as to the purpose of the payments made for the bene?t of General Holie?eld that are described in Plaintiff? Complaint. RESPONSE: 27 175115388001 1215/2618 33:42 PM "Received? ?for mag?? ?'??ktahd cam}: Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 125. Admit that the NTC sponsored, directly and/or indirectly, NASCAR-related events (including races). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 126. Admit that the sponsorship, directly and/or indirectly, of NASCAR-related events (including races),was not an activity allowed to be conducted by the NTC as a tax?exempt organization described by lntemal Revenue Code ?501(c). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 127. Admit that the NTC sponsored, directly and/or indirectly, the 400 NASCAR race(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 128. Admit that the sponsorship, directly and/or indirectly, the 400 NASCAR race(s), is not an activity allowed to be conducted by the NTC as a tax-exempt organization described by Internal Revenue Code ?501(c) RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 129. Admit that the NTC does not have any facts to support the allegation set forth at Complaint 1119 that the speci?c charges comprising the referenced $187,145 in credit card charges were not in payment of charges incurred by Alphons Iacobelli for the bene?t of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 130. Admit that the NTC does not have any facts to support the allegation set forthlat Complaint 1[19 that the speci?c charges comprising the referenced $187,145 in credit card charges were not in payment of charges incurred by Alphons Iacobelli in furtherance of the conduct of the business affairs of the NTC. RESPONSE: 28 175115388001 12/5/2018 "Riercseaveafer Fem ""?oakram emu-my Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 131. Admit that the NTC cannot identify the speci?c charges that comprise the $259,298 in credit card charges that were allegedly unrelated to NTC business, as referenced at Complaint ?20. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 132. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli did not direct the NTC to pay the personal credit card charges of Defendant Susanne Iacobelli, as alleged at Complaint 1123. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 133. Admit that Susanne Iacobelli did not request the NTC to pay the personal credit card charges of Defendant Susanne Iacobelli, as alleged at Complaint 1B3. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 134. Admit that there is no factual basis for the allegation by the NTC and set forth at Complaint {[23 that all of the charges in the amount of $868,736 on Susanne Iacobelli?s American Express account ?were unrelated to NTC business expenses.? RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 135. Admit that the NTC cannot in good faith allege that all of the charges in the amount of $868,736 on Susanne Iacobelli?s American Express account ?were unrelated to NTC business expenses.? RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 136. Admit that the NTC does not have any factual support for the allegation set forth at Complaint {[26 that Alphons Iacobelli engaged in any ?active concealment.? RESPONSE: 29 175115388001 12/5/2618 "1:11..an Received ?fer ?tting?? Ceunty Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 137. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support the allegation set forth at Complaint 1129 that Alphons Iacobelli ?knowingly concealed payments to themselves [Alphons Iacobelli and Jerome Durden] and others for the purchase of various personal items and travel.? RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 138. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli disclosed to one or more of?cers or directors of the NTC, including those appointed by the UAW to the NTC, the alleged ?payments to themselves [Alphons Iacobelli and Jerome Durden] and others for the purchase of various personal items and travel? as that phrase is used at Complaint 1129. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 139. Admit that the NTC knew, prior to June 9, 2015, of all of the payments by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 140. Admit that the NTC knew, prior to June 9, 2015, of all of the payments by the NTC to and/or for the bene?t of Susanne Iacobelli. RESPONSE REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 141. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support the allegation set forth at Complaint 1129 that Alphons Iacobelli engaged in ?theft from the RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 142. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support the allegation set forth at Complaint 1131 that payments to Alphons Iacobelli were ?illegal.? RESPONSE: 30 175115388001 12/5/2018 3:42 mm Received Oakland Gaunt}! Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 143. Admit that the NTC has not conducted any investigation to determine which of?cers, directors and/or other agents and/or representatives of the NTC were aware of alleged payments to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli contemporaneously with such payments. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 144. Admit that the NTC has not conducted any investigation to determine which of?cers, directors and/or other agents and/Or representatives of the NTC were aware of alleged payments to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli and when the NTC was ?rst aware of such payments. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 145. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support the allegation set forth at Complaint 1131 that Alphons Iacobelli caused the issuance of a check in the amount of $262,219 to MMS Mortgage Services, Ltd. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 146. Admit that the issuance of a check in the amount of $262,219 to MMS Mortgage Services, Ltd. was authorized by one or more of?cers of the NTC other than Alphons Iacobelli. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 147. Admit that the Alphons Iacobelli?s disclosure of disbursements by the NTC was suf?cient to Constitute disclosure to the NTC of such disbursements. RESPONSE: 31 I 175115388001 12/6/20? 8 3&4'2' ?pm "mated to: Filing "County Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 148. Admit that the General Holiefield?s actual knowledge of disbursements by the NTC was suf?cient to constitute the knowledge of the NTC of such disbursements. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 149. Admit that the Richard Palmer?s actual knowledge of disbursements by the NTC was sufficient to constitute the knowledge of the NTC of such disbursements. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 150. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support the allegation set forth at Complaint 1132 that Alphons Iacobelli caused the NTC ?to pay $544,000 for swimming pools, spas, outdoor kitchens and landscaping at the homes of Defendants Alphons and Susanne Iacobelli and of Defendant Morgan and General Holie?eld.? issuance of a check in the amount of $262,219 to MS Mortgage Services, Ltd. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 151. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support the allegation set forth at Complaint $135 that Alphons Iacobelli?s engaged in ?embezzlement.? RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 152. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support any contention that Alphons Iacobelli participated in collecting the NTC credit card statements that were being mailed to the NTC. RESPONSE: 32 175115388001 A 4'4144'A-4-j ?12/5/28?! 8 3:42 PM F1 "Rec??ii?a to? Filing O73 mam-"c: minty lerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 153. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support any contention that Alphons Iacobelli participated in changing the security settings for the NTC accounting software. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 154. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support the allegation at Complaint 1142 that Alphons Iacobelli made any misrepresentations of material fact to the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 155. Admit that the specific misrepresentations of material fact referenced at Complaint 1142 were not false when made. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 156. Admit that the NTC did not rely upon those misrepresentations referenced at Complaint 1142. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 157. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support the allegation at Complaint 1142 that it reasonably relied upon those alleged misrepresentations referenced at Complaint 1142. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 158. Admit that the NTC did not suffer any damages by reason of any reasonable reliance upon those alleged misrepresentations referenced at Complaint 1142. RESPONSE: 33 1751153881101 12/5/2oia 3:42 PM FELED R?bei?ed? for Filing dainty Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 159. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli was never a Director of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 160. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli was never a Co-President of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 161. Admit that the NTC learned prior to June 9, 2015 that the alleged misrepresentations referenced at Complaint 1142 were false. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 162. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support the allegations set forth at Complaint 1152. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 163. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli did not have any duty to act in the best interests. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 164. Admit that the NTC did not repose trust, faith and con?dence i'n.Alpho'ns Iacobelli. RESPONSE: 34 '175115388001 PM is: Filing? ??O??kiaind county Clerk ?l . REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 165. Admit that the NTC never communicated to Alphons Iacobelli that the NTC believed that it had reposed of trust, faith and con?dence in Alphons Iacobelli. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 166. Admit thatthe NTC never communicated to Alphons Iacobelli that the NTC believed that it expected Alphons Iacobelli to act in the best interests of the NTC and not FCA US. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 167. Admit that the NTC expected Alphons Iacobelli to act in the best interests of FCA US. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 168. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli did not engage in any conduct that concealing the existence of the claims against Mr. Iacobelli. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 169. Admit that the NTC has no factual basis to support the allegation at Complaint 1175. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 170. Admit that the NTC requested payment and/or reimbursement from CA US for all sums expended by the NTC. RESPONSE: 35 17511538830] 12/5/2018 FILED Receiveafm Finng' "'O'iakif'a?e?aCeunty cserk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 171. Admit that the NTC received payment and/or reimbursement from FCA US for all sums expended by the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 172. Admit that the process by which the NTC requested payment and /or reimbursement from FCA US was established prior to the commencement of Alphons Iacobelli?s association with the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 173. Admit that the process by which the NTC requested payment and /or reimbursement from FCA US was established prior to the commencement of Alphons Iacobelli?s association with the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 174. Admit that the NTC used the ?reserve? funds held in an account in the name of the NTC for the purpose of making payments to and providing things of value to UAW of?cers, UAW employees and others within the scope of UAW Leadership (or the relatives of the foregoing) in an effort to obtain bene?ts, concessions,-and advantages for FCA US in the negotiation, implementation, and administration of the collective bargaining agreements between FCA US and the UAW. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 175. Admit that FCA US used the ?reserve? funds held in an account in the name of the NTC for the bene?t of FCA US. RESPONSE: 36 175115388001 ..- - -. 1: "raze'xacrs'aiaz PM Re?e?sgea icy-2mm '?Oak'iiaf?dCamry Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 176. Admit that used the ?reserve? funds held in an account in the name of the NTC for the bene?t of FCA US. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 177. Admit that controlled the use by the NTC of the? ?reserve? funds held 1n an account in the name of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 178. Admit that there is one or more letter agreement(s) between the NTC and FCA US relating to the reimbursement funds spent. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 179. Admit that there is one or more letter agreement(s) between the NTC and FCA US relating to the advance of money anticipation of funds to be spent by the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 180. Admit that there is one or more letter agreement(s) between the NTC and FCA US relating to draw requests by the NTC in connection with the construction of the WCM Academy. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 181. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli did not have any authority to release funds from the bank account(s) titled in the name of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 182. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli did not have any authority to authorize payment by the NTC from the bank account(s) titled 1n the name of the NTC. RESPONSE: 37 7175115388001 12/5/2618 3:42 BLED Received re: Filing? Oakland Ccunty Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 183. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli was not responsible for determining the amount of any contribution and/or remittance by the NTC to one or more charities established by and/or associated with one or more of the UAW members of the NTC Board of Directors, and/or UAW Leadership. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 184. Admit that Jerome Durden did not have any authority to authorize payment by the NTC from the bank account(s) titled in the name of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 185. Admit that Jerome Durden was not responsible for determining the amount of any contribution and/or remittance by the NTC to one or more charities established by and/or associated with one or more of the UAW members of the NTC Board of Directors, and/or UAW Leadership. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 186. Admit that in the ordinary course of business of the NTC, the NTC made contribution and/or remittances to one or more charities established by and/or associated with the UAW members who were or were held out to be of?cers of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 187. Admit that the NTC used funds held in accounts titled in the NTC bank accounts to pay for extended stays by UAW employees and/or of?cials in Palm Springs, CA. RESPONSE: 38 175115388001 12/5/2o18 3:42 PM negated in? Hang oak?eand County Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 188. Admit that Alphons Iacobelli did not establish the process by which the NTC was reimbursed by CA US for funds expended by and/or on behalf of the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 189. Admit that Alphons lacobelli was required to follow the process by which the NTC was reimbursed by FCA US for funds expended by and/or on behalf of FCA US. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 190. Admit the existence of a letter agreement (or other writing, however denominated) between John Franciosi and Nate Golden relating to the ?backstop? of NTC expenses, addressing the obligation of FCA US to cover incremental expenses up to $20 Million above the ?draw? amount. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 191. Admit that pursuant to a letter agreement betWeen FCA US and the UAW, the ??oat? maintained by the NTC to cover expenses not recorded on the draw requests made by the NTC to FCA US REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 192. Admit that the NTC is not a bona ?de tax exempt organization within the meaning of Internal Revenue Code ?501(c). RESPONSE: 39 175115388001 12/5/2618 3:42 PM R?C?iVed for "canary Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 193. Admit that the particular NTC ?Vice President? position occupied by Alphons Iacobelli was actually held by CA US, and was occupied from time-to-time by Alphons Iacobelli as the person designated by CA US to hold that position. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 194. Admit that the particular NTC ?Vice President? position occupied by Alphons Iacobelli was actually held by FCA US, and that Alphons Iacobelli occupied that position on behalf of FCA US, and served at the pleasure of FCA US. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 195. Admit that the particular NTC position of ?Co-Chair of the Joint Activities Board? was actually held by FCA US, and was occupied from time?to-time by Alphons Iacobelli as the person designated by CA US to hold that position. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 196. Admit that the particular NTC position of ?Co?Chair of the Joint Activities Board? was actually held by FCA US, and was occupied from time-to?time by Alphons Iacobelli on behalf of FCA US and served at the pleasure of FCA US. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 197. Admit that at all relevant times, Alphons Iacobelli was FCA designee to the position of Vice?President of the NTC. RESPONSE: 40 175115388001 121151201 8 3:42 PM Clerk" REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 198. Admit that during the entirety of Alphons Iacobelli?s association with the NTC, Mr. Iacobelli was CA designee as Co-Chairman of the Joint Activities Board. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 199. Admit that the particular NTC position of ?Co-Chair of the Joint Activities Board? occupied by Alphons Iacobelli was actually held by FCA US, and was occupied from time? to-time by Alphons Iacobelli as the person designated by FCA US to hold that position. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 200. Admit that did not assign to FCA US the rights held by in the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 201. Admit that disclosure by Alphons Iacobelli to any director and/or of?cer of the NTC of the payment(s) to Alphons Iacobelli satis?ed Alphons Iacobelli? obligation, if any, to disclose to the NTC such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 202. Admit that disclosure by Alphons Iacobelli to any director and/or of?cer of the NTC of the payment(s) for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli satis?ed Alphons Iacobelli? obligation, if any, to disclose to the NTC such payment(s). . RESPONSE: 41 175115388001 12/5/2018 342PM Reteneiam Fitting Oakland County Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 203. Admit that disclosure by Alphons Iacobelli to any director and/or of?cer of the payment(s), if any, for the bene?t of Susanne Iacobelli satis?ed Alphons Iacobelli?s obligation, if any, to disclose to the NTC such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 204. Admit that the actual knowledge of any director of the NTC of the payment(s) to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli relieved Alphons Iacobelli of the obligation, if any, to disclose to the NTC such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 205. Admit that the actual knowledge of any of?cer of the NTC of the payment(s) to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli relieved Alphons Iacobelli of the obligation, if any, to disclose to the NTC such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 206. Admit that disclosure by Jerome Durden to any director and/or director of the NTC of the payment(s) to Alphons Iacobelli constituted disclosure of such payment(s) to the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 207. Admit that disclosure by Jerome Durden to any director and/or of?cer of the NTC of the payment(s) for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli constituted disclosure of such payment(s) to the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 208. Admit that disclosure by Jerome Durden to any director and/or of?cer of the payment(s) for the bene?t of Susanne Iacobelli constituted disclosure of such payment(s) to the NTC. RESPONSE: 42 175115388001 12/5/2018 3&42 PM R'?cea?vea oun?ty Clerk REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 209. Admit that the actual knowledge by any director of the NTC of the payment(s) to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli constituted knowledge of the NTC of such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 210. Admit that the actual knowledge by any of?cer of the NTC of the payment(s) to and/or for the bene?t?of?Alphons Iacobelli constituted knowledge of the NTC of such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 211. Admit that the actual knowledge by any director of the NTC of the payment(s) to and/or for the bene?t of Susanne Iacobelli constituted knowledge of the NTC of such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 212. Admit that the actual knowledge by any of?cer of the NTC of the payment(s) to and/or for the bene?t of Susanne Iacobelli constituted knowledge of the NTC of such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 213. Admit that disclosure by Jerome Durden and/or Alphons Iacobelli to any director and/or of?cer of the NTC of the payment(s) to Jerome Durden satis?ed Alphons Iacobelli?s obligation, if any, to disclose to the NTC such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 214. . Admit that disclosure by Jerome Durden and/or Alphons Iacobelli to any director and/or of?cer of the NTC of the payment(s) to Jerome Durden satis?ed Jerome Durden?s obligation, if any, to disclose to the NTC such payment(s). RESPONSE: 43 175115388001 12/5/2018? "Received "is; ierk . . REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 215. Admit that disclosure by Jerome Durden and/or Alphons Iacobelli to any director of the of the payment(s) for the bene?t of Jerome Durden satis?ed Alphons Iacobelli?s obligation, if any, to disclose to the NTC such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 216. Admit that disclosure by Jerome Durden to any director of the NTC of the payment(s) for the bene?t of Susanne Iacobelli satis?ed the obligation, if any, of Jerome Durden and/or Alphons Iacobelli to disclose to the NTC such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 217. Admit that the actual knowledge by any director and/or of?cer of the NTC of the payment(s) to and/or for the bene?t of Alphons Iacobelli relieved Alphons Iacobelli of the obligation, if any, to disclose to the NTC such payment(s). RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 218. Admit that disclosure by Alphons Iacobelli to any director of the NTC of the payment(s) to Alphons Iacobelli constituted disclosure of such payment(s) by Alphons Iacobelli to the NTC. RESPONSE: REQUEST FOR ADMISSION: 219. Admit that disclosure by Jerome Durden to any director of the NTC of the payment(s) for the bene?t of Jerome Durden constituted disClosure of such payment(s) byjAlphons Iacobelli to the NTC. RESPONSE: 44 71751153811001 121*5/2018 R?'c'?sve?a "fa? Clerk Dated: November 21, 2018 175115388001 Respectfully submitted, NEDELMAN LEGAL GROUP PLLC By: Michael A. Nedelman Michael A. Nedelman (P3 5433) Attorney for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 Telephone: 248-855-8888 1nnedelman@nglegal.com 45 '1 2/5/2018 3:42 PM, rearing Oa'kiand County Clerk STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM a MICHIGAN CORPORATION, Plaintiff, CASE No. Hon. D. Langford Morris v. ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual Defendants. MADDIN, HAUSER, ROTH HELLER NEDELMAN LEGAL GROUP PLLC By: Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) By: Michael A Nedelrnan (P35433) Attorneys for Plaintiff Attorneys for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli 28400 Northwestern Hwy, 2nd Floor and Susanne lacobelli South?eld, MI 48034 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 (248 354-4030 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 Mharrell@maddinhauser.com (248) 855-8888 mnedelman?lnglegalcom AUSTIN HIRSCI-H-IORN, P.C. THE GRACEY LAW FIRM, PLLC Austin (P15001) Judith S. Gracey (P39766) Attorney for Defendant Monica Morgan Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden 888 W. Big Beaver Rd., Suite 402 22,00 Beechmont Street Troy, MI 48084 Keego Harbor, MI 48320 (248) 680 1660 (248) 221-7726 austinh@ix.netcom.com CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on November 21, 2018 I served a copy of Defendants? First Request for Admission to Plaintiff and this Certi?cate of Service, on: 46 175115388001 . . 12/5/2018? 3:42 PM County Clerk? MADDIN, HAUSER, ROTH HELLER By: Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy, 2nd Floor South?eld, MI 48034 (248 354-4030 Mharrell@maddinhauser.com AUSTIN P.C. Austin (P15001) Attorney for Defendant Monica Morgan 888 W. Big Beaver Rd; Suite 402 Troy, MI 48084 i (248) 680 1660 THE GRACEY LAW FIRM, PLLC Judith S. Gracey (P39766) Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden 2200 Beechmont Street Keego Harbor, MI 48320 (248) 221-7726 iudith@thegraceylaw?rmcom Via email. I declare that the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. 175115388001 Michael A. Nedelman Michael A. Nedelman 47 A far-"mmg Oaki?athoumy Cie'rk '12i5/2618' 3:42 PM EXHIBIT 12/5/2618 3:42 pmm-w A. 'Recea'veamr-Fmg o'a?kaam County Clerk STATE .OF MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM a Michigan Non-Pro?t Corporation, Plaintiff, V. ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual, Defendants. Case No. 2018-166226-CZ Hon. Denise Langford Morris Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy, Second Floor South?eld, MI 48034 (248) 354-4030 mharrell@maddinhauser.com Michael A. Nedelman (P3 543 3) Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC Attorney for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 855-8888 mnedelman@nglegal.com Austin (P151001) Austin PC. Attorneys for Defendant Monica Morgan 888 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 402 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 680-1660 austinh@ix.netcom.com Judith S. Gracey (P39766) The Gracey Law Firm, PLLC Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden 2200 Beechmont Street Keego Harbor, MI 48320 (248) 221?7726 DEFENDANT ALPHONS RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Defendant Alphons Iacobelli responds as follows in- response to Plaintiff First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents (?Discovery Requests?) to Defendant Alphons. Iacobelli. 175115381.001_2018.11.16 12/5/2018 3:42 PM FELED Reteive?d for Filing I 'O?k'iahd'COU'nty Clerk GENERAL OBJECTION: Defendant objects to a_ll of the Interrogatories for the reason that Defendant is prohibited by MCL ?600.2162 from testifying in this matter (which includes being required toanswer under oath any Interrogatories) absent the consent of his spouse, Susanne Iacobelli, a co-Defendant in this matter; Ms. Iacobelli has not consented to Alphons Iacobelli testifying in this matter. This General Objection is incorporated by reference into each of the following responses as if fully set forth therein. Additional objections are asserted as appropriate to specific Interrogatories in an effort to apprise Plaintiff of those additional applicable objections and/or privileges; provided, however, that Defendant reserves the right to assert such other defenses and/or privileges as may be appropriate if further responses to these Interrogatories are required. IN TERROGAT ORIES INTERROGATORY: 1. Have you read and reviewed the definitions and instructions that constitute the preamble to these Discovery Requests? ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 2. I Identify the person(s) answering these Discovery Requests, as well as each person(s) who assisted in such answers other than counsel. ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 175115381001 '12i5/2018 3:42 far Filing I ?'O?akiaiid County Clerk 3. Identify each person you consulted in responding to these Discovery Requests, other than counsel, and state the nature of your relationship to each identi?ed person. ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 4. Prior to signing and responding to these Discovery Requests, have you made a full and complete search of your books, records, papers, and all other documents with a view toward eliciting all available information necessary to answering and responding to each Interrogatory and Document Request? If your answer is please: a. State each reason why you have chosen not to conduct a full and complete search and inquiry, as referenced above; b. Identify each book, record, paper, or other document you could have consulted in providing full and complete responses to these Interrogatories and Document Requests, but chose not to consult; and c. Pursuant to MCR 2.310, produce copies of all documents identi?ed in your response to Interrogatory No. 4 b, above. ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 5. Identify all persons which you know of, or intend to call or may call as a witness at trial, and/or who have or are believed to have knowledge of any of the facts or contentions . alleged in the Complaint, or in any documents relating thereto or regarding same", and for each such person state: a. The person?s full name, address and phone number; b. The relationship of the person to you and the claims in this case; 3 175115381.001 12/5/2818 3&422' PM Reserved for Filing Oakland?Couhty Clerk ANSWER: Whether you have taken any written or recorded statements from such person regarding any?of the facts involved in this case, and, if so, state the date each statement was taken; (ii) the identity of the person who took each statement; and the identity of the person who has custody of each statement; Whether each person is presently, or has ever been, employed/retained by any party herein and, if so, which party and in what capacity; With particularity the facts and/or knowledge which the person has and/or the expected content and substance of the person?s testimony; and i The identity of all documents on which the person may rely on in support of his/her testimony. See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 6. Identify each expert you have consulted or employed to render an opinion with respect to the subject matter of this litigation, regardless of whether you have retained or compensated such expert(s) and regardless of whether you intend to call such expert(s) at trial, and as to each such expert state: a. b. ANSWER: The subject matter about which the expert is expected to testify; The substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify, and A summary of the grounds for each expert?s opinion. See General Objection. INTERRO GATORY: 175115381001 ?ma/rota? 3:42 PM FILED County Clerk 7. Provide the following as to each and every ?nancial institution you have held any type of account from 2010 to the present: a. b. ANSWER: The name of the ?nancial institution. The address of the ?nancial institution. The account number. All name(s) on the account. All name(s) of the authorized signatories on the account. The type of account, checking, savings, money market, certi?cate of deposit, IRA, mutual funds, securities. - The date of opening the account. The date of closing the account (if applicable). See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 8. Provide the following as to every credit card account you have had and/or used from 2010 to the present: a. The type of credit card, e. Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Discover. b. The name of ?nancial institution for the credit card account. 0. The account number. d. The name of all authorized users on the credit card account. 6. The date of opening the credit card account. f. The date of closing the credit card account (if applicable). 175115381001 12/5/2811 8 3:42 PM Receives County Clerk ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. IN TERROGATORY: 9. If you currently own any real property, for each property provide the following: a. Address; b. 7? Date of purchase; c. Purchase price; d. Identify any co-owners; and 6. Identify any mortgages, liens or other encumbrances. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 10. Have you sold any real property that you had an ownership interest within the past 10 years? If so, for each provide the following: a. Property address; b. Identify any co-owners; b. Name of the buyer(s); b. Date of sale; 0. Sale price; and d. Identify any mortgages, liens or other encumbrances at the time of sale. 175115381.001 PM FELED Received for" Filing? "oakiam County Clerk ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based. upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 11. For any automobile, boat, or airplane (?vehicle?) you purchased from 2010 to the present, provide the following: a. The type of vehicle, automobile, boat, or airplane. b. The year of the vehicle. b. The make and model of the vehicle. c. The date you purchased the vehicle. d. The purchase price of the vehicle. The name(s) of any co?owners of the vehicle. e. The method of payment for the vehicle. f. The date you sold the vehicle (if applicable). ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: - 12. For any corporation, limited liability company, partnership or; other entity that you currently have an interest, for each entity provide following information: a. The name, any assumed names, the date incorporated or organized, and its state of incorporation or organization. - 175115381.001 12/5/2018 3:42 PM Rates-eataming: Clerk b. The address and telephone number of its principal place of business, and provide the name of any website and email address that the entity maintains. c. The address and telephone number of its registered of?ce within the State of Michigan. d. The name, address and telephone number of the registered/resident agent for service of process. e. The name, address and phone number of all members, shareholders or partners. f. The percentage of your interest owned. g. The percentage of ownership of all other members, shareholders or partners. h. The person who manages or operates such entity. i. Any title or position held by you. j. A description of the business of the entity. k. All assets owned by such entity. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 13. As to any payments or reimbursements made by NTC to you from 2010 to the present, for each provide the following: a. b. 175115381001 The date of the payment or reimbursement. The amount of the payment or reimbursement. State in detail what the payment or reimburSement was for, e. vehicles, travel, clothes, jewelry, dining, entertainment, services, etc. 12/5/2618 3:42 PM Retrieved fer Filing awry Clerk d. The reason for the payment or reimbursement. e. The method of the payment or reimbursement. f. The person(s) from NTC who authorized the payment or reimbursement. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 14. As to any payments or reimbursements you authorized on behalf of NTC for you, Susanne, Durden, Morgan and Holie?eld from 2010 to the present, for each provide the following: a. The date of the payment or reimbursement. b. The amount of the payment or reimbursement. 0. State in detail what the payment or reimbursement was for, vehicles, travel, clothes, jewelry, dining, entertainment, services, etc. (1. The reason for the payment or reimbursement. e. The method of the payment or reimbursement. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional-privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 175115381.001 Ri?c??tv??d? to? O?kifand County Clerk 15. State in detail the reason for. the payment made by NTC to Sallie Mae on behalf of your daughter. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination Defendant also objects to the request for the reason that the request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, andlsuch examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. INTERROGATORY: 16. State in detail all improvements made to 1749 Piccadilly Court, Rochester Hills, MI 48309 with the use of NTC funds. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 17. State the total cost for all improvements made to 1749 Piccadilly Court, Rochester Hills, MI 48309 using NTC funds. ANSWER: 10 175115381001 12/5/2018 31:42 PM Clerk See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 18. Identify all contractors, vendors or other persons or entities what were involved with the improvements that were made to 1749 Piccadilly Court, Rochester Hills, MI 48309 using NTC funds. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 19. State all position(s) that you held at NTC. ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 20. Describe in detail any instructions that you gave to Durden regarding the processing and payment of any expenses submitted to NTC for payment by you and/or Susanne. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 11 175115381001 PM R??t??sv?a?fer?ii?g?" Oakland County Clerk 21. State the factual basis for each and every Af?rmative Defense that you raised in response to the Complaint. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant further objects for the reason that Defendant has not yet been required to assert, and has not asserted, any af?rmative defenses in response to the Complaint INTERROGATORY: 22. Identify the business reason of NTC that you used NTC funds to purchase a Ferrari. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant further objects to the Interrogatory for the reason that it is unintelligible, and Defendant cannot determine the nature of the question presented. INTERROGATORY: 23. identify the person at NTC who authorized the use of NTC funds for the purchase of your Ferrari. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self?incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 24. Identify the business reason of NTC that you used NTC funds to purchase the Mont Blanc pens. - ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant further objects to the Interrogatory for the reason that it is unintelligible, and Defendant cannot reasonably determine the nature of the question presented. 12 1751153811301 125nm183?2?M'?" Received feral-Filing ?4 Oakland comfy Clerk" Defendant respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination if this Interrogatory is determined to be intelligible. INTERROGATORY: 25. Identify the person who authorized the use of NTC funds for the purchase of your Mont Blanc pens.? ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self?incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 26. Identify the business reason of NTC that you used NTC funds to pay for the installation of improvements made at your home in Rochester Hills. ANSWER: A See General Objection. Defendant further objects to the Interrogatory for the reason that it is unintelligible, and Defendant cannot reasonably determine the nature of the question presented. Defendant respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination if this Interrogatory is determined to be intelligible INTERROGATORY: 27. Identify the person who authorized the use of NTC funds to pay for the installation of the improvements made at your home in Rochester Hills. ANSWER: 13 175115381001 121?5/2618 ?Receivedfer'Fiimg? Clerk See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to ansWer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 28. State the total amount of NTC funds that were paid by NTC for your non?NTC business expenses. 1 ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. Respectfully submitted, NEDELMAN LEGAL GROUP, PLLC By: Michael A. Nedelman Michael A. Nedelman (P35433) Attorneys for Defendant Alphons Iacobelli Dated: November 16, 2018 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 armington Hills, Michigan 48334 Telephone: (248) 855-8888 14 175115381.001 12/5/2018 R?teiimd "for Filing? Clerk REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS RES QUEST: 1. Produce all documents requested throughout these Interrogatories ad identi?ed in your responses to these Interrogatories in accordance with MCR 2.310. RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in his possession, custody and/or control any non?privileged documents responsive to this Request. REQUEST: 2. As to each expert you have consulted or employed to render an opinion with respect to the subject matter of this litigation, regardless of whether you have retained or compensated such expert, and regardless of whether you intend to call such expert at trial, produce and attach copies of: a. His or her curriculum vitae, professional resume, or similar document regarding education, employment, quali?cations, licenses, and professional organizations; b. Each written report and/or document you have receivedlfrom each such expert; 0. Each and every document or item of tangible evidence which has been provided to each such expert, whether by you, your counsel, or any third party or entity; d. Each and every document reviewed by each such expert in his or her study, assessment or evaluation of the subject matter of this litigation and his or her expected area of expert testimony; e. Each and every document relating in any manner to the date,_nature, ?ndings, result of any and all tests, studies or simulations conducted by each such expert; f. Each and every article, table, study or similar document reviewed, utilized or relied upon by each such expertin reaching his or her opinion or opinions concerning the subject matter of this litigation; 15 1751153131001 12/572618 FILED amalgam: Filingi'Oakiand Cauniy'merk g. All evidence and/or other documents not already requested and which were relied upon or utilized by each such expert in reaching his or her opinion(s) concerning the subject matter of this litigation; and h. Each and every document regarding your agreement or contract with respect to each such expert as to compensation and expenses. RESPONSE: There are no documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: 3. Produce copies of all statements, notes, transcripts, diaries, calendars or other documents in your possession, custody or control, given by or related to any person(s), obtained by you, or your attorneys or representatives, which relate in any manner to the facts and issues of this litigation, or any claim'or defense. RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in his possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. 4. Produce a copy of the deed for any real property you currently own. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek infonnation- within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to: lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is-in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving 16 175115381001 12/5i2618? 3:42- "Received: "fer Firing oakiamrmumy Clerk the Objection, Defendant does not have within his possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. 5. Produce copies all current mortgages and promissory notes for any real property you currently own. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiffs request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within his possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. REQUEST: 6. Produce copies of all current liens and other encumbrances against any real property you currently own. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to .lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving 17 175115381001 12/5/2018 3:42 R?c?ixied ferTilin? Demand County Cierk' the Objection, Defendant does not have within his possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: 7. Produce copies of all mortgages, liens and other encumbrances discharged/released against any real pr0perty you currently own. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within his possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: 8. Produce copies of your state and federal tax returns (audited and unaudited), including all W-2S and K-ls, from 2010 to the present. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does'not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery-or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, 18 175115381001 n?mi?AN. 423. .- 1- .. . 12/5/2018 3:42 magma tar mm; "ea 1<1a11acmmy Clerk and such examination is not permitted priorto the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within his possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: 9. Produce copies of all your checking, savings, money market, certi?cates of deposit, IRA, mutual funds, securities or any other account statements from 2010 to the present. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within his possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. QUEST: 10. Produce copies of all your credit card statements from 2010 to the present. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff? request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, 19 175115331001 12/5/2618 3:42 PM "Received oamam-?c-o-my Clerk and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within his possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within his possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: 11. Produce copies of the title and purchase agreement, contract or invoice for any automobile, boat, or airplane you purchased from 2010 to the present, including the 2013 Ferrari 45 8 Spider. . RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within his possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. QUEST: 12. Produce copies of all documents relating to all improvements made to your residence at 1749 Piccadilly Court, Rochester Hills, MI 48309, including but not limited. to contracts, agreements, proposals, bids, plans, drawings, invoices, statements, bills, receipts, letters, facsimiles, e?mails and text messages. RESPONSE: 20 175115381001 1215,1209 18' 3512'" PM "Received 'fizi?i??F72iaingf' 'osmasa Camry Clerk Defendant does not have in his possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. RES QUEST: 13. Produce copies of the documents evidencing the payment made by NTC to Sallie Mae on behalf of your daughter. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seekrinformation within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of anOther party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within his possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: l4. Produce copies of all documents evidencing any payments or reimbursement made by NTC on your behalf from 2010 to the present. RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in his possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. RES QUEST: 15. Produce copies of all documents evidencing any authorization by NTC to pay or reimburse you for any of your personal expenses. 21 175115381001 mezzo-is 3:42 is: Pizzas cam-a County Clerk RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in his possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. RES QUEST: 16. Produce copies of all communications, including but not limited to, letters, e- mails, notes, facsimiles, text messages, instant messages, LinkedIn, Facebook, or by any other mode, method,ror manner of communications, between you and Jerome Durden between 2010 through the present. I RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in his possession, custody and/or control any non?privileged documents responsive to this Request. REQUEST: 17. Produce copies of all communications, including but not limited to, letters, e- mails, notes, facsimiles, text messages, instant messages, LinkedIn, acebook, or by any other mode, method, or manner of communications, between you and General Holie?eld between 2010 until the time of his death. RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in his possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. REQUEST: '18. Produce copies of all communications, including but not limited to, letters, e? mails, notes, facsimiles, text messages, instant messages, LinkedIn, Facebook, or by any other mode, method, or manner of communications, between you and Monica Morgan between 2010 22 175115381001 for?F?aing Dakifand eomy Clerk" through the present. RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in his possession, custody and/0r control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. RES QUEST: 19. Produce any document which supports any matter raised as a defense to the Complaint; if any document is not in your possession, please provide the name, address, and telephone number of the person or entity that has possession or control of the document. Any responses to this request are without prejudice to your ability to supplement as discovery progresses. RESPONSE: Defendant cannot identify and does not have in his possession, custody and/or control any non- privileged documents responsive to this Request for the reason that he has not as of yet raised any defenses to the Complaint; Defendant reserves the right to assert such objections as may be appropriate if and when any defenses are required to be raised. RES QUEST: 20. Produce all exhibits which you propose to introduce at trial. This request shall be deemed continuing so as to require further and supplemental production if you obtain additional documents required to be produced herein between the time of the initial production and the time of trial. RESPONSE: 23 175115381.001 12/512018 3642 PM ?iin?gg?"?"?b7?stand" County Clerk Defendant has not yet proposed to introduce any exhibits at trial, if any, of this matter and therefore Defendant does not have in his possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. Dated: November 16 2018 175115381001 Respectfully submitted, By: Michael A. Nedelman Michael A. Nedelman (P35433) Attorneys for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, Michigan 48334 Telephone: (248) 855-8888 mnedelman@nglegal.com 24 - -.: 12i5/2ci 8 "Received fer "eakia?iiri County Clerk MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM a Michigan Non?Pro?t Corporation, Plaintiff, V. ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual, Defendants. Case No. 2018-166226-CZ Hon. Denise Langford Morris Michelle C. Harrell (P487 68) Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy., Second Floor South?eld, MI 48034 (248) 354-4030 mharrell@maddinhauser.com Michael A. Nedelman (P3 5433) Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC Attorney for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 855-8888 mnedelman@nglegal.com Austin (P 15 1001) Austin PC. Attorneys for Defendant Monica Morgan 888 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 402 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 680-1660 austinh@ix.netcom.com Judith S. Gracey (P39766) The Gracey Law Firm, PLLC Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden 2200 Beechmont Street Keego Harbor, MI 48320 (248) 221?7726 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on November 16 2018, I served a copy of Alphons Iacobelli?s Response to Plaintiff?s First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents on all counsel of record via email and by ?rst class mail. I declare that the above statement is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. 175115381001 ls/ Michael A. Nedelman ,Michael A. Nedelman 25 12/5/2018 3:42 4 FitEo} Firing Clerk STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM a Michigan Non-Pro?t Corporation, Plaintiff, v. ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual, Defendants. Case No. 2018-166226-CZ Hon. Denise Langford Morris Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy, Second Floor South?eld, MI 48034 (248) 354-4030 rnharrell@maddinhauser.corn Michael A. Nedelrnan (P35433) Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC Attorney for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 855?8888 mnedelman@nglegal.com Austin (P151001) Austin PC. Attorneys for Defendant Monica Morgan 888 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 402 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 680?1660 austinh@ix.netcorn.com Judith S. Gracey (P39766) The Gracey Law Firm, PLLC Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden 2200 Beechmont Street Keego Harbor, MI 48320 (248) 221?7726 a CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify. that on November 16 2018, I served a copy of Alphons Iacobelli?s Response to Plaintiff?s First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production 1 of DOCuments on all counsel of record via email and by ?rst class mail. I declare that the above statement is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. 175115381001 Michael Nedelrnan Michael A. Nedelman-. 25 12/5/2018 3:42 'R?ceived'for Filing. O?ki?and County Clerk STATE or MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM a Michigan Non-Pro?t Corporation, Plaintiff, V. ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual, Defendants. Case No. Hon. Denise Langford Morris Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy., Second Floor Southfield, MI 48034 (248) 354-4030 mharrell@maddinhauser.com Michael A. Nedelman (P35433) Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC Attorney for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 855-8888 mnedelman@nglegal.com Austin (P151001) Austin PC. Attorneys for Defendant Monica Morgan 888 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 402 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 680?1660 austinh@ix.netcom.com Judith S. Gracey (P39766) The Gracey Law Firm, PLLC Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden 2200 Beechmont Street Keego Harbor, MI 48320 (248) 221?7726 DEFENDANT SUSANNE RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Defendant Susanne Iacobelli responds as follows in response to Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents (?Discovery Requests?) to Defendant Susanne Iacobelli. 12My2018:ra2rna FELED . Ret?w?edfm Filing .. OaklandCounty Clerk GENERAL OBJECTION: Defendant objects to a_ll of the Interrogatories for the reason that Defendant is prohibited by MCL ?600.2162 from testifying in this matter (which includes being required to answer under oath any Interrogatories) absent the consent of her spouse, Alphons Iacobelli, a co-Defendant in this matter; Mr. Iacobelli has not consented to Susanne Iacobelli testifying in this matter. This General Objection is incorporated by reference into each of the following responses as if fully set forth therein. Additional objections are asserted as appropriate to speci?c Interrogatories in an effort to apprise Plaintiff of those additional applicable objections and/or privileges; provided, however, that Defendant reserves the right to assert such other defenses and/or privileges as may be appropriate if further responses to these Interrogatories are required. INTERROGATORIES INTERROGATORY: 1. Have you read and reviewed the de?nitions and instructions that constitute the preamble to these Discovery Requests? ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 2. Identify the person(s) answering these Discovery Requests, as well as each person(s) who assisted in such answers other than counsel. ANSWER: See General Objection. 17515382.001 12/5/2018 3:42 PM FELED Received? fn'r'Fiting Oakland Gaunt}! Clerk 3. Identify each person you consulted in responding to these Discovery Requests, other than counsel, and state the nature of your relationship to each identi?ed person. ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 4. Prior to signing and responding to these Discovery Requests, have you made a full and complete search of your books, records, papers, and all other documents with a View toward eliciting all available information necessary to answering and responding to each Interrogatory and Document Request? If your answer is please: a. State each reason why you have chosen not to conduct a full and complete search and inquiry, as referenced above; b. Identify each book, record, paper, or other document you could have consulted in providing full and complete responses to these Interrogatories and Document Requests, but chose not to consult; and c. Pursuant to MCR 2.310, produce copies of all documents identi?ed in your response to Interrogatory No. 4 b, above. ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 5. Identify all persons which you know of, or intend to call or may call as a witness at trial, and/or who have or are believed to have knowledge of any of the facts or contentions alleged in the Complaint, or in any documents relating thereto or regarding same, and for each such person state: a. The person?s full name, address and phone number; b. The relationship of the person to you and the claims in this case; 3 - 17515382001 - - mite/2018? 3:42 'R-zecavuea to? ?Fitting? "03k'iann""'county Clerk? 0. Whether you have taken any written or recorded statements from such person regarding any of the facts involved in this case, and, if so, state the date each statement was taken; (ii) the identity of the person who took each statement; and the identity of the person who has custody of each statement; d. Whether each person is presently, or has ever been, employed/retained by any party herein and, if so, which party and in what capacity; 6. With particularity the facts and/or knowledge which the person has and/or the expected content and substance of the person?s testimony; and f. i The identity of all documents on which the person may rely on in support of his/her testimony. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also objects to the request for the reason that the request asks Defendant to identify ?all persons which you [Defendant] know of? is vague, ambiguous, and does not seek nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and is therefore beyond the permissible scope of discovery. Defendant further objects to the request to the extent it seeks the identi?cation of all persons who Defendant knows of ?in any documents relating thereto or regarding same,? for the reason that the request in unintelligible and does not reasonably describe the documents requested to be identi?ed. Defendant respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination if this Interrogatory is determined to be intelligible INTERROGATORY: 6. Identify each expert you have consulted or employed to render an opinion with respect to the subject matter of this litigation, ?regardless: of whether. you have retained or compensated such expert(s) and regardless of whether you intend to call such expert(s) at trial, andas to each such expert state: a. The subject matter about which the expert is expected to testify; 17515382001 12/5/2018 3:42 Fl iR??e'i?v?i?'dqt?r FilingOakiand "County Clerk b. The substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify, and c. A summary of the grounds for each expert?s opinion. ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERRO GATORY: 7. Provide the following as to each and every ?nancial institution with which you, directly or indirectly, individually and/or as joint account holder, have held any type of account from 2008 to the present: a. The name of the ?nancial institution. b. The address of the ?nancial institution. 0. The account number. d. All name(s) on the account. e. All name(s) of the authorized signatories on the account. f. The type of account, checking, savings, money market, certi?cate of deposit, IRA, mutual funds, securities. g. The date of opening the account. h. The date of closing the account (if applicable). ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also objects to the request for the reason that the request does not seek nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and is therefore beyond the permissible scope of discovery. Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. IN TERROGATORY: 1751538200] 3:42 PM "'aeseea?veia Clerk 8. Provide the following as to every credit card account you have had and/or used from 2008 to the present: a. The type of credit card, Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Discover. b. The name of ?nancial institution for the credit card account. c. (T he account number. (1. The name of all authorized users on the credit card account. e. The date of opening the credit card account. 1 f. The date of closing the credit card account (if applicable). ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. Defendant also objects to the request for the reason that the request does not seek nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and is therefore beyond the permissible scope of discovery. Plaintiff? 3 request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. INTERROGATORY: 9. If you currently own any real property, for each property provide the following: a. b. 17515382001 The address. The date purchased. The purchase price. The name, address and phone number of any co-owners. 12/53/201 8 Fl "es-mam" Camry lerk .1 IL. 6. Identify all current mortgages, liens and other encumbrances. f. Identify all mortgages, liens or other encumbrances discharged/released since the date of purchase. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also objects to the request for the reason that the request does not seek nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and is therefore beyond the permissible scope of discovery. Plaintiff request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. INTERROGATORY: 10. For any automobile, boat, or airplane (?vehicle?) you purchased, directly or indirectly, individually or with another person, from 2008 to the present, provide the following: a. The type of vehicle, automobile, boat, or airplane. b. The year of the vehicle. b. The make and model of the vehicle. 0. The date you purchased the vehicle. d. The purchase price of the vehicle. I d. The name(s) of any co-owners of the vehicle. 6. The method of payment for the vehicle. f. The date you sold the vehicle (if applicable). ANSWER: 1 See General Objection. Defendant also objects to the request for the reason that the request does not seek nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and is 17515382001 121mm 8 sixty-PM. Resigned? Filing?? egress County Clerk therefore beyond the permissible scope of ?discovery. Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. INTERROGATORY: 11. the present: ANSWER: Provide the following information with respect to your employment from 2008 to Name, address and phone number of each employer. Your job title or position. Hourly rate or yearly salary. Date employment began. Date employment ended. See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 12'. For any corporation, limited liability company, partnership or other entity that you currently have an interest, for each entity provide following information: 17515382001 a. The name, any assumed names, the date incorporated or organized, and its state of incorporation or organization. b. The address and telephone number of its principal place of business, and provide the name of any website and email address that the entity maintains. c. The address and telephone number of its registered of?ce within the State of Michigan. d. The name, address and telephone number of the registered/resident agent for service of process. The name, address and phone number of all members, shareholders or partners. 12/5/2818 3:42 PM 1 1 "Filing Oakiand canary lerk .2. f. The percentage of your interest owned. g. The percentage of ownership of all other members, shareholders or partners. - h. The person who manages or operates such entity. i. Any title or position held by you. j. A description of the business of the entity. k. 1A11 assets owned by such entity. ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 12 [sic]. As to any payments or reimbursements made by NTC to you from 2008 to the present, for each provide the following: a. The date of the payment or reimbursement. b. The amount of the payment or reimbursement. 0. State in detail what the payment or reimbursement was for, e. vehicles, travel, clothes, jewelry, dining, entertainment, services, etc. d. The reason for the payment or reimbursement. e. The method of the payment or reimbursement. f. The person(s) from NTC who authorized the payment or reimbursement. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self?incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 17515382001 12/5/2018 "R?C?lvied forFillr??g?" *-*-osmasm County Clerk 13. State in detail .the reason for the payment made by NTC to Sallie Mae on behalf of your daughter. ANSWER: Defendant respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self?incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 14. State in detail all improvements made to 1749 Piccadilly Court, Rochester Hills, MI 48309 with the use of NTC funds. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self?incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 15. State the total cost for all improvements made to 1749 Piccadilly Court, Rochester Hills, MI 48309 using NTC funds. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 16. Describe in detail all reason(s) why you had your American Express card charges paid by NTC. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-inerimination. 10 17515382001 12/5/2018 3:iFritiE?D" *ogn?am County Clerk IN TERRO GATORY 17. Describe in detail the process by which you submitted your credit card bills to NTC for payment, including but not limited to the identity of the person to which you tendered the bills for payment, the method that you provided them to NTC (mail, email, etc.). ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 18. Identify and describe in detail all communications that you had with any representative of NTC regarding any questions, concerns or inquiries regarding your American Express card charges. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 19. Identify and state the date (month, day, and/or year) of when you ?rst learned that your American Express bills were being paid funds. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 11 17515382001 ELM ?Ur. A 4 12/5/2618 3:42 PM FILED Received fawning Clerk 20. State the identity of the person(s) or entity(s) that you believed were paying your American Express bills, including the time period(s) of the payments by such person/entity, and the reason(s) that they were paying your bills. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORE: 21. Identify all positions that you held with NTC, including the time period, title and duties; ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self?incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 22. Identify all amounts and expenses charged to your American Express bills that were paid by NTC. that were business expenses incurred by you on behalf of NTC. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to anSWer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Ammdment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 23. State the amount(s) that you yourself paid to American Express for your American Express bills during the last six (6) years. - ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based 12 17515382001 12/5/2618 3:42 PM FILED Reba-vied ?for Filing ?Oakland County Clerk upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. 24. Identify and describe in detail all jobs or other types of employment that you have held during the last six (6) years. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. 25. State whether you have ever used, visited, and/or enjoyed the pool, patio or outdoor kitchen at your home. ANSWER: See General Objection. INTERROGATORY: 26. Identify and describe in detail any involvement or role that you had in the design, installation or placement of the landscaping, pool, patio and outdoor kitchen installed at your home. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 27. State whether you ever drove or rode in the Ferrari. owned by your husband Alphons. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. 13 17515382001 12/5/2018 3:42 PM Firm? Received INTERROGATORY: 28. Describe in detail your relationship, if any, with Morgan, including whether you and/or Alphons attended her wedding to Holie?eld. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. 29. State whether you have ever visited the home of Morgan and Holiefield on Mazuchet Drive and viewed their pool, landscape and outdoor kitchen. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also respectfully declines to answer the Interrogatory based upon her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional privileges against self-incrimination. INTERROGATORY: 30. Identify all vacations that you took using your American Express credit card during the last six (6) years. ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant also objects to the request for the reason that the request does not seek nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and is therefore beyond the permissible scope of discovery. Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. INTERROGATORY: I I 31. State in detail the factual basis for each and every Af?rmative Defense that you stated in your Answer to the Complaint. l4 . ?515382.001 3:42 PM FitEo??Receive?d for Filing Oakland" comy Clerk ANSWER: See General Objection. Defendant further objects for the reason that Defendant has not yet been required to assert, and has not asserted, any af?rmative defenses in response to the Complaint. Respectfully submitted, NEDELMAN LEGAL GROUP, PLLC By: Michael A. Nedelman Michael A. Nedelman (P35433) Attorneys for Defendant Alphons Iacobelli Dated: November 16, 2018 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, Michigan 48334 Telephone: (248) 855-8888 REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 1. Produce all documents requested throughout these Interrogatories an_d identi?ed in your responses to these Interrogatories in accordance with MCR 2.310. RESPONSE: None. QUEST: 2. As to each expert you have consulted or employed to render an opinion with respect to the subject matter of this litigation, regardless of Whether you have retained or compensated such expert, and regardless of whether you intend to call such expert at trial, produce and attach copies of: i I a. His or her curriculum Vitae, professional resume, or similar document regarding education, employment, quali?cations, licenses, and professional organizations; 15 17515382001 I 12/5/2018? 3 42 PM FILED Received for-Filing!" O?kiand County Clerk b. Each written report and/or document you have received from each such expert; 0. Each and every document or item of tangible evidence which has been provided to each such expert, whether by you, your counsel, or any third party or entity; d. Each and every document reviewed by each such expert in his or her study, assessment or evaluation of the subject matter of this litigation and his or her expected area of expert testimony; e. Each and every document relating in any manner to the date, nature, ?ndings, result of any and all tests, studies or simulations conducted by each such expert; f. Each and every article, table, study or similar document reviewed, utilized or relied upon by each such expert in reaching his or her opinion or opinions concerning the subject matter of this litigation; g. All evidence and/or other documents not already requested and which were relied upon or utilized by each such expert in reaching his or her opinion(s) concerning the subject matter of this litigation; and h. Each and every document regarding your agreement or contract with respect to each such expert as to compensation and expenses. RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in her possession, custody and/or control any non?privileged documents responsive to this Request. RES QUEST: 3. Produce copies of all statements, notes, transcripts, diaries, calendars or other documents in your possession, custody or control, given by or related to any person(s), obtained by you, or your attorneys or representatives, which relate in any manner "to the facts and issues of this litigation, or any claim or defense. RESPONSE: I 16 l7515382.001 12/5/2018 3:42 PM County Clerk Defendant does not have in her possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. RES QUEST: 4. Produce a copy of the deed for any real property you currently own. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does/not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s'request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within her possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. REQUEST: 5. Produce copies all current mortgages and promissory notes for any real property you currently own. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving 17 l7515382.001 magma 3:42 PM FBLED Firing?"DemandCeuniy Clerk the Objection, Defendant does not have within her possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. REQUEST: 6. Produce copies of all current liens and other encumbrances against any real property you currently own. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information Within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of .the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within her possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: 7. Produce copies of all mortgages, liens and other encumbrances discharged/released against any real property you currently own. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the. party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff 5 request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, 18 17515382001 212/5/2'01'8m3i42 R?eceaearar Filing ?ib?klaind County Clerk and such examination is not permitted prior. to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within her possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: 8. Produce copies of your state and federal tax returns (audited and unaudited), including all W-2s and K?ls, from 2010 to the present. RESPONSE: i, Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within her possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: 9. Produce copies of all your checking, savings, money market, certi?cates of deposit, IRA, mutual funds, securities or any other account statements from 2010 to the present. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible 19 17515382001 12/5/2618? 3:42 PM - 1 LED '1 Receives ?Cot: my lerk up- evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff 3 request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within her possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. 10. Produce copies of all your credit card statements from 2010 to the present. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information Within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff? 5 request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within her possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request 11. Produce copies of the title and purchase agreement, contract or invoice for any automobile, boat, or airplane you purchased from 2010 to the present. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead. to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a judgment, if any. 20 17515382001 1215/2201 8 3:42 inr?ili?i?lin?g?? Clerk Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within her possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: 12. Produce copies of all documents relating to all improvements made to your residence during the period of 2010 to the present at 1749 Piccadilly Court, Rochester Hills, MI 48309, including but not limited to contracts, agreements, proposals, bids, plans, drawings, invoices, statements, bills, receipts, letters, facsimiles, e-mails and text messages. RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in her possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. QUEST: 13. Produce copies of the documents evidencing the payment made by NTC to Sallie Mac on behalf of your daughter. RESPONSE: Objection. The request does not seek information within the permissible scope of discovery, for the reason that it does not seek information that is itself relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the claim Or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of another party, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. By way of further objection, Plaintiff?s request is in the nature of a creditors? exam, and such examination is not permitted prior to the entry of a. judgment, if any. Without waiving the Objection, Defendant does not have within her possession, custody or control any of the documents responsive to this request. RES QUEST: 21 17515382001 12/5/2018 Raga-ve?a to? Hung?" "Oakland County ierk 14. Produce copies of all documents evidencing any payments or reimbursement made by NTC on your behalf from 2008 to the present. RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in her possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. QUEST: 15. Produce copies of all documents evidencing any authorization by NTC to pay or reimburse you for any of your personal expenses. RESPONSE: Defendant does not have in her possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. RES QUEST: 16. Produce any document which supports any matter raised as a defense to the Complaint; if any document is not in your possession, please provide the name, address, and telephone number of the person or entity that has possession or control of the document. Any responses to this request are without prejudice to your ability to supplement as discovery progresses. RESPONSE: Defendant cannot identify and does not have in her possession, custody and/or control any non- privileged documents responsive to this Request for the reason that he has not as of yet raised any defenses to the Complaint; Defendant reserves the right to assert such objections as. may be appropriate if and when any defenses are required to be raised. REQUEST: 22 17515382001 12/6/2918 3:42 PM fer Filing 'O?k'i'ia?thoimty Clerk 17. Produce all exhibits which you propose to introduce at trial. This request shall be deemed continuing so as to require further and supplemental production if you obtain additional documents required to be produced herein between the time of the initial production and the time of trial. RESPONSE: Defendant has not yet' proposed to introduce any exhibits at trial, if any, of this matter and Defendant therefore cannot identify and does not have in her possession, custody and/or control any non-privileged documents responsive to this Request. Respect?illy submitted, By: Michael A. Nedelman Michael A. Nedelman (P35433) Attorneys for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 armington Hills, Michigan 48334 Telephone: (248) 855-8888 Dated: November 16, 2018 mnedelman@nglegal.com 23 17515382001 12/5/2018 3:42 PM Reba-?mats or County ierk' STATE-OF MICHIGAN IN THE OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM a Michigan Non-Pro?t Corporation, Plaintiff, V. ALPHONS IACOBELLI, an individual, SUSANNE IACOBELLI, an individual, JEROME DURDEN, an individual, and MONICA MORGAN, an individual, Defendants. Case No. 2018-166226-CZ Hon. Denise Langford Morris Michelle C. Harrell (P48768) Maddin, Hauser, Roth Heller, PC. Attorneys for Plaintiff 28400 Northwestern Hwy., Second Floor South?eld, MI 48034 (248) 354-4030 mharrell@maddinhauser.com Michael A. Nedelman (P35433) Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC Attorney for Defendants Alphons Iacobelli and Susanne Iacobelli 28580 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 140 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 (248) 855-8888 mnedelman@nglegal.com Austin (P151001) Austin P.C. Attorneys for Defendant Monica Morgan 888 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 402 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 680?1660 austinh@ix.netcom.com Judith S. Gracey (P39766) The Gracey Law Firm, PLLC Attorney for Defendant Jerome Durden 2200 Beechmont Street Keego Harbor, MI 48320 (248) 221-7726 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on November 16 2018, I served a copy of Susanne Iacobelli?s Response to Plaintiff?s First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents on all counsel of record via email and ?rst class mail. declare that the above statement is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. 17515382001 Michael A. Nedelman Michael A. Nedelman 24